Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A was rejected by the CIT(E) due to non-furnishing of requisite details. The assessee claimed the order was ex-parte as they were not informed about notices and the impugned order. The appeal was filed after a delay.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) and restored the matter for a fresh decision, granting the assessee an opportunity to present its case. The provisional registration was also ordered to be restored.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) order rejecting the registration application was justified, and if the assessee was denied an adequate opportunity to be heard.
Sections Cited
12A, 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta
आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’] dated 26/10/2024, rejecting the application of the assessee for registration under of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
Shree Seva Samaj Trust vs. The CIT(E)
2 2. The appeal is time-barred by 45 days. A separate application has been filed for condonation of delay, wherein it has been pleaded that the impugned order of the CIT(E) was received by the appellant on e-mail on 18/09/2023, which was operated by the appointed Auditor, Mansi Bhatt & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Baroda for F.Y. 2022-23. However, the said auditor had not informed the appellant for these notices and, therefore, the appellant had not aware of them which were issued on 19/07/2023, 19/08/2023 & 12/09/2023, which remained unattended and the appellant was not even informed about the ex-parte impugned order dated 18/09/2023 rejecting registration u/s.12AB of the Act. The Ld.Counsel has also submitted that in the end of March-2024 that the appellant again contacted an auditor and came to know regarding the impugned order. Immediately, the appellant had appointed a new C.A., namely N.R. Parikh & Co. in April- 2024, who advised the appellant to file the present appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the order of the CIT(E) to submit that the Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee for final registration u/s.12A of the Act, on the ground of non-furnishing of requisite details as were called for by the Ld.CIT(E). However, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the acknowledgement downloaded from the Income Tax Portal, showing that the assessee had furnished online the requite details, but the same perhaps escaped the attention of the Ld.CIT(E), resulting into pass the ex-parte order dated 26/10/2026.
The Ld. Departmental Representative, however, relied upon the findings of the Ld. CIT(E).
Shree Seva Samaj Trust vs. The CIT(E)
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of view that the interests of justice will be well-served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(E). In view of this, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) is hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for decision afresh, after giving proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The provisional registration already granted to the assessee, but was cancelled due to dismissal of its application for final registration vide impugned order is ordered to be restored till the fresh decision of the Ld. CIT(E) on this restored matter.
With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13/08/2025.