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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 129/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 April 20255 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. The Tribunal held that due to the ignorance of the trustees and inadvertent non-compliance with the requisite details within the stipulated time before the CIT(E), the matter should be remanded. The Tribunal noted the assessee's submission that they actually run an educational institute, as reflected in their audit report. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the matters to the file of the CIT(E) for a fresh consideration of the applications. The CIT(E) was directed to pass an order taking into account the evidence filed by the applicant trusts and to provide the applicant trusts with an opportunity of hearing, following the principles of natural justice. Consequently, both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by Gyanda Education Trust and Gyanjivan Education Trust against orders dated 28-09-2024 passed by the CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad. The assessment years are not specified. The trusts had initially obtained provisional registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, they filed applications in Form 10AB for final registration. During the process, the CIT(E) issued notices seeking certain requirements. The trusts' reply at point no. 18 of Form 10AB mistakenly stated that the Trust was not running any educational institute, when in fact it was. The CIT(E) issued a further notice for clarification and proof of approval for running an educational institute, which the trusts failed to comply with. Consequently, the CIT(E) rejected their applications. The appeals were filed with a delay, which the appellant attributed to the accountant leaving the job and the trustees' inexperience with technicalities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB and cancelling the provisional registration, thereby rejecting the application under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the rejection was based on a technical ground, specifically a mistake at point no. 18 of Form 10AB, where it was incorrectly stated that the Trust was not running an educational institute. The assessee asserted that it actually runs an educational institute and possesses all necessary approvals. They also contended that the trustees were novice and ignorant about the technicalities of email and websites, leading to inadvertent non-compliance with departmental notices. The assessee requested that the matter be remanded to the CIT(E) for proper adjudication and sought an opportunity to file correct documents. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue relied upon the order passed by 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

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 →