GYANDA EDUCATION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 128/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 April 20255 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It noted the submission that due to the ignorance of the trustees, the requisite details were not filed within the stipulated time before the CIT(E), and that the applicant trusts actually run educational institutes, as reflected in their audit reports. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the matters to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The CIT(E) is to pass an order taking into account the evidences filed by the applicant trusts and provide them an opportunity of hearing, following the principles of natural justice. Therefore, both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. The specific issue of whether the trusts were running educational institutions was not definitively decided by the Tribunal but was to be re-examined by the CIT(E).

What were the facts?

These appeals by Gyanda Education Trust and Gyanjivan Education Trust challenge orders dated 28-09-2024 by the CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad. The trusts had initially obtained provisional registration under Section 12A. Upon applying for final registration in Form 10AB, they received notices on 02.07.2024 and 05.08.2024. The trusts responded on 12.08.2024, but mistakenly stated in point no. 18 of their reply that they were not running any educational institute, despite being an educational trust. A subsequent notice on 25.09.2024 seeking clarification and proof of approvals for running an educational institute was not complied with. Consequently, the CIT(E) rejected their applications. The appeals were filed with a delay, attributed to the departure of the trust's accountant and the trustees' unfamiliarity with procedural aspects.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law and facts by rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB and cancelling the provisional registration, contrary to the fact that the trusts are running educational institutions. 2. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law and facts by rejecting the application on a technical ground (mistake at point no. 18 of Form 10AB) when the reality is that the trusts are functioning as educational institutions with necessary approvals. 3. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) erred in law and facts in rejecting the application under Section 12A due to the novice and ignorant officials of the trust regarding technicalities of email and website, leading to inadvertent non-compliance. Assessee's Contentions: The trusts argued that the rejection was based on a technical mistake at point no. 18 of Form 10AB, and that they are indeed running educational institutions with all required approvals. They also cited the ignorance of their officials regarding technicalities of email and website as a reason for inadvertent non-compliance. They requested the matter be remanded to the CIT(E) for proper adjudication, offering to file correct documents if given another opportunity. They relied on the principle of natural justice. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue relied upon the order of the CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMARMS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Hersh Jani, A.R
For Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT-D.R

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 128/Ahd/2025
ITA No.129/Ahd/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश/ORDER PER: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

1.

These two appeals are filed against the separate orders dated 28-09-2024 passed by CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad for assessment year N.A. & 129/Ahd/2025 Gyanda Education Trust & Gyanjivan Education Trust A.Y. NA 2. The grounds of appeals are as under:-

“1 The learned CIT (Exmp) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB of the Act and also cancelling the provisional registration.

2 The learned CIT(Exmp.) has erred in law and on facts in passing a rejection order on a technical ground being a mistake at point no 18 of application Form 10AB that the Trust is not running any Educational Institute however in reality it is the converse. The Trust has all the required approvals from the concerned authorities for functioning as an Educational Institute. Hence the rejection order should be cancelled.

3 The Ld CIT(Exmp) has erred in law and facts in rejecting the Application u/s 12A inspite of the fact that the officials of the Trust being novice and ignorant about the technicalities of Email and website. Hence the order rejecting the application should be cancelled.

4 The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of appeal.”

“1 The learned CIT (Exmp) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB of the Act and also cancelling the provisional registration.

2 The learned CIT(Exmp.) has erred in law and on facts in passing a rejection order on a technical ground being a mistake at point no 18 of application Form 10AB that the Trust is not running any Educational Institute however in reality it is the converse. The Trust has all the required approvals from the concerned authorities for functioning as an Educational Institute. Hence the rejection order should be cancelled.

3 The Ld CIT(Exmp) has erred in law and facts in rejecting the Application u/s 12A inspite of the fact that the officials of the Trust being novice and ignorant about the technicalities of Email and website. Hence the order rejecting the application should be cancelled.

4 The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of appeal.”

& 129/Ahd/2025 Gyanda Education Trust & Gyanjivan Education Trust A.Y. NA 3. Firstly we are taking up the appeal being ITA No. 128/Ahd/2025. The facts of the case are that the applicant Trust filed an application for registration of Trust u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Form 10A and was granted a provisional registration on 10.03.2022. On completion of the provisional period the trust had again filed an application in Form 10AB for final registration of trust u/s. 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. After filing of the application certain requirements were raised vide letter / notices dated 02.07.2024 and 05.08.2024. The applicant trust filed its reply on 12.08.2024 along with the required details, however, at point no. 18 of its reply where it was supposed to mention “Whether the Trust/Institute runs any Education Institute / hospital etc.”, it had by mistake written – “Trust is not running any of the mentioned activity as of now”. The applicant was served with another notice dated 25.09.2024 seeking clarification and copy of permission or approval from concerned authorities for running educational institute. But the applicant trust did not comply the same. The CIT(E) rejected the application of the applicant trust vide order dated 28.09.2024. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(E), the applicant trust filed appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

The Ld. AR submitted that there is a delay of 51 days in filing the appeal which is due to the reason that the accountant of the trust left the job and the trust was not aware about the procedural part of filing the appeal. Hence, the Ld. AR requested to condone the delay in filing the present appeal. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the accountant of the Trust had left the job and the trustees being novice and ignorant about the technicalities of Email and IT web portal ignored the said notice from the department. As a result there was inadvertent & 129/Ahd/2025 Gyanda Education Trust & Gyanjivan Education Trust A.Y. NA noncompliance on the part of the trust. The Ld. AR submitted that the applicant trust will filed the correct documents, if the opportunity is given to the trust once again. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that the matter may be remanded to the CIT(E) for proper adjudication. The CIT-D.R. relied upon the order of the CIT(E).

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant record. The delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. The Ld. AR submitted that due to the ignorance of the trustees the requisite details were not filed within the stipulated time before the CIT(E) and the applicant trust actually runs the educational institute. This aspect was reflected in its audit report as per submissions of the Ld. AR. Therefore, in the interest of justice it will be appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the CIT(E) for consideration of the application afresh and to pass an order by taking into consideration the evidences filed by the applicant trust. The applicant trust be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Thus, is partly allowed for statistical purpose. the appeal is identical to the earlier appeal decided by us being ITA No. 129/Ahd/2025. Hence, the delay in filing this appeal is also condoned and the matter is remanded to the file of the CIT(E) for consideration of the application afresh and to pass an order by taking into consideration the evidences filed by the applicant trust. The applicant trust be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Thus, is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

& 129/Ahd/2025 Gyanda Education Trust & Gyanjivan Education Trust A.Y. NA 7. In the result, both the appeals of the respective appellant /applicant trusts are allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →