Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a trust, applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected the application on the grounds that the trust failed to submit substantial documentary evidence and did not conclusively prove its charitable nature and public utility.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had not been given adequate opportunity to submit its documents and explanations. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(E) to consider the application afresh after considering the submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration under Section 12AB without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee to submit evidence and explanations.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 2(15), 13(1)(b), 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: N.A) Shri Dasalad Gyati Samast Kalol, The Commissioner of Vs. Dasalad Wadi, Income Tax(Exemption), Nr. State Bank of India, Ahmedabad. Kalol, Panchmahal, Gujarat-389330. [PAN :AAETS2946 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri SN Divatia with Shri Samir Vora, ARs Respondent by: Shri Sher Singh CIT. DR Date of Hearing 30.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order 28.03.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
1.1 The order passed by U/s.12AB passed on 28.03.2024 by CIT(Exem), Ahmedabad rejecting the application for registration of the appellant trust u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and cancelling the provisional registration is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice.
Shri Dasalad Gyati Samast Kalol Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 2– 2.1 The Id. CIT(Exem), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not appreciating fully and properly the submissions made and evidence produced by the appellant in support of the contention that it was a public charitable trust within the ambit of sec.2(15) of the Act so that it was entitled to registration u/s 12AB of the Act. 3.1 The Id. CIT(Exem), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act holding that the appellant trust was not for the benefit of public, though the appellant trust had produced enough evidence to prove that it was established and also carrying on activities for the general public utility. 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the Id. CIT(Exem), ought not to have rejected the application for registration by mis-construing the object clause of the trust and disregarding the activities carried on by it which conclusively proved that the trust was established and carrying on for the advancement of general public utility and as such it was within the ambit of Sec. 2(15) of the Act. 3.3 The Id. CIT(Exem), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not appreciating that the appellant was enjoying registration u/s 12A of old regime. 4.1 The Ld.CIT(Exem.) has grievously erred in law and or on fact in holding that the provisions of sec 13(1)(b) were applicable because the appellant was a religious trust and not composite trust. 4.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the Ld.CIT(Exem), ought not to have held that the provisions of sec 13(1)(b) were applicable because the appellant was a religious trust and not composite trust.
The facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust and had applied for registration under Form No.10AB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the I.T Act, 1961, since the assessee-trust failed to submit the substantial documentary evidences.
Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.
Shri Dasalad Gyati Samast Kalol Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 3–
At the outset, we find that notices were issued from time to time to furnish details/documents as called for. The Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee on the ground that the assessee-trust failed to produce substantial documents before the Ld.CIT(E). Therefore, the Ld. Counsel prayed that given an opportunity, the same would be apprised to the Ld.CIT(E). Ld. CIT(DR) argued that the assessee-trust needs to furnish requisite details/explanations and submissions before the Ld. CIT(E). Having considered the facts on record, we hold that interests of justice would be well served by remanding the matter to the Ld. CIT(E) for consideration of the application afresh and to pass an order by taking into consideration the submissions /explanations submitted by the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 31.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (T.R SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 31.07.2025 MV Shri Dasalad Gyati Samast Kalol Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 4– आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy