Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Trust, applied for registration under Section 12AB/12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(Exemption) rejected these applications, citing the assessee's failure to submit requisite details/explanations and non-response to email notices.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the applications were rejected due to alleged non-submission of details by the assessee. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to remand both matters back to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh consideration, providing the assessee an opportunity to present all necessary submissions and explanations.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Exemption) was justified in rejecting the Trust's applications for registration and approval under various sections of the Income Tax Act due to alleged non-compliance and non-submission of details, and if adequate opportunity was provided to the assessee to present its case.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12AB(1)(c), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 115TD, 80G(5)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: N.A) Shri Krishna Foundation, The Commissioner of Vs. Opp. Abay Ghat, Income Tax(Exemption), Gandhi Ashram, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380027. [PAN :AAGTS6546 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vivek Chavda, AR Respondent by: Shri RP Rastogi, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 08.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 15.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay Condoned These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, vide order dated 04.12.2024 & 16.12.2024. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
1.1 The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appellant's application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by order dtd:04.12.2024. Krishna Foundation Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 2– 1.2 The learned CIT (Exemption) erred in cancelling the provisional registration granted to the appellant under section 12AB(1) (c) without providing sufficient and specific opportunity to the appellant to present its case. Therefore, the appellant shall be granted opportunity to produce additional evidences. 2.1 The learned CIT (Exemption) erred in treating non-response to email notices as non-compliance when: a. The trustees had already demonstrated their compliance by submitting all required documents with Form 10AB b. The inability to respond to notices was due to practical difficulties in accessing email, not willful non-compliance. c. The trust has consistently maintained transparency in its operations. The learned CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application solely on the ground of non-submission of a note on activities and other unspecified details, without: a. Considering the documents already submitted with the Form 10AB application b. Examining the objects and activities mentioned in the trust deed c. Verifying the financial statements and other documents on record 2.3 The learned CIT(Exemption) failed to appreciate that mere non- submission of additional information within the short time provided does not justify rejection of registration under section 12AB, especially when provisional registration was already granted earlier. 3.1 Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(Exemption) erred in directing computation of tax liability under section 115TD without appreciating that said provision is not applicable in case of rejection of application for registration.
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 ITA Nos. 478-479/Ahd/2025 Krishna Foundation Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 3– Act, 1961, since the assessee-trust failed to submit any details/explanation and genuineness of the activities of the Trust.
Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.
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 that the assessee-trust has neither filed any submission nor sought any adjournment. 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.
Since we have remanded the issue to the Ld.CIT(E) in against rejecting of application u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, we also set-aside the issue for approval of registration u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act in ITA No.479/Ahd/2025 for fresh consideration. -479/Ahd/2025 Krishna Foundation Vs. CIT Asst. Year : N.A - 4– 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.