Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant filed an application for registration under Section 12AA and approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the applications due to non-compliance with notices seeking information regarding the genuineness of the trust's activities.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the appellant failed to provide necessary information due to reasons beyond its control. The Tribunal held that the appellant deserves another opportunity and restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application for registration and approval due to non-compliance with notices, or if the appellant deserved another opportunity to furnish information.
Sections Cited
12AA, 80G(5), 12A(1)(ac)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeals at the instance of appellant are directed against the orders framed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune both dated 09.11.2024 denying grant of registration u/s.12AA and approval u/s.80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
Tersely, the facts of the case pertaining to Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act for grant of regular registration u/s.12A of the Act on 30.06.2024. In order to verify the genuineness of activities of the appellant, the ld. CIT (Exemption) issued notices through ITBA portal on 22.08.2024, 08.10.2024 calling upon the appellant trust to file certain information/clarification. There was no compliance by the appellant to such notices. In the and 2442/PUN/2024 Smt. L.B. Joshi Foundation circumstances, the ld.CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the appellant, thereby cancelling the provisional registration granted to it.
Similar position prevailed in respect of application filed for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act which came to be rejected by the ld.CIT(Exemption) for non compliances to the notices issued.
Aggrieved appellant approached the Tribunal challenging the impugned orders denying grant of registration u/s.12AA of the Act as well as denial of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act.
We have heard the parties and perused the relevant material on record. We observe that, the appellant applied for registration under clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act on 30.06.2024. Upon perusal of Form 10AB and accompanying documents, the ld. CIT(E) by issue of notices dated 22.08.2024 and 08.10.2024 called upon the appellant to substantiate its existence and genuineness of activities carried out and to furnish certain information / clarification with their respect etc., however these notices went futile owing to non-compliance by the appellant. In absence of requisite material to arrive at positive satisfaction, the ld. CIT(E) concluded that he is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities and thus rejected to grant recognition u/s. 12AA of the Act. Apparently in the present case, there has been a non-compliance on the part of appellant to various notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) which led to rejection to grant of 12AA recognition to the appellant foundation. We note that, for a similar non-compliance the appellant’s 80G and 2442/PUN/2024 Smt. L.B. Joshi Foundation application was also rejected by the Revenue which was also challenged by the appellant before this Tribunal.
In so far as the merits of the case is concerned, it transpires from the records that, the appellant trust could not be represented before the ld. CIT(E) in securing the registration u/s. 12AA of the Act for the genuine and sufficient reasons. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the appellant before us that appellant could not submit the requisite documents before the ld.CIT(E) for the bonafide reasons which are beyond control of the appellant trust. He submitted that the appellant is in a position to submit the documents evidencing the charitable activities of the foundation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that, the appellant deserves one more opportunity of being heard, ergo we restore the file to the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application for registration denovo by according sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the appellant to adduce necessary and requisite information, documents, undertaking and declaration etc. as deemed necessary under the provisions of the Act. Needless to state that, the appellant shall invariably comply with the direction of ld. CIT(E) in adjudicating the application, without seeking any unreasoned adjournment. It is also made clear that appellant should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes. and 2442/PUN/2024 Smt. L.B. Joshi Foundation :
7. The instant appeal is against the order framed by ld.CIT(A) denying grant of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act. Since we have remanded the issue of grant of registration to the file of ld.CIT(E) for denovo adjudication, therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to remit the issue of grant of approval u/s.80G(5) as well to the file of ld.CIT(E), being consequential.
8. In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 04th day of March, 2025.