SHRI VISHA KHADAYATA MUTA TAD KELVANI MANDAL,NADIAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2001/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 February 2025Bench: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that minor procedural errors should not lead to outright rejection and the CIT(E) should consider applications on their merits. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application solely on the ground of a clerical error in selecting the wrong sub-clause in Form 10AB, instead of considering the merits of the application.

What were the issues?

Whether rejection of registration application under Section 12A solely for a clerical error in form submission, without considering merits and providing opportunity for rectification, is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Shah, AR
For Respondent: Shri PLrathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Hearing: 13/02/2025Pronounced: 14/02/2025

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 14/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 17-10-2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(E)"] rejecting the application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"].

2.

The assessee raised following grounds of appeal: Shri Visha Khadayata Muta Tad Kelvani Mandal 2

1. Rejection Order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Ahmedabad is bad in Law and against the natural justice.

2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Ahmedabad has erred in Law and on facts, in rejecting the application in form 10AB U/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3. The ld. CIT(E) failed to appreciate the clerical error committed in selecting appropriate head in drop down list provided in e-filing portal while furnishing Form 10AB electronically cannot lead to denial of registration, more particularly, on the fact that appellant is fulfilling all the conditions provided u/s 12A for becoming eligible to obtain registration.

4. Your appellant crave, leave to add, alter, & or to amend modify substitute all or any ground of appeal before final hearing if necessity so arise.

3.

During the course of hearing before us, the Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee contended that the rejection of its application was based solely on a clerical error in selecting the appropriate clause while filing Form 10AB. The assessee had erroneously applied under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, and the CIT(E) rejected the application on this procedural ground without considering its merits. The AR further submitted that the CIT(E) had issued notices on 06/08/2024 and 09/09/2024, seeking additional details regarding the application under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, indicating that the application was initially accepted for processing. However, before the assessee could respond to these notices, a subsequent notice dated 13/09/2024 was issued, questioning the validity of the application based on the incorrect clause selection. The rejection order was passed without providing the assessee an opportunity to rectify the procedural defect. Shri Visha Khadayata Muta Tad Kelvani Mandal 3.1. The assessee placed reliance on various judicial precedents, including Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust vs. CIT(E) (ITA No. 369/SRT/2024), where the ITAT Surat Bench held that minor procedural errors in filing should not lead to outright rejection, and the CIT(E) must consider applications on their merits. The assessee also cited decisions of the Ahmedabad ITAT in the case(s) of Uttar Gujarat Shikshan Seva Trust (ITA No. 1090/AHD/2023) and Sauhard vs. CIT(E) (ITA No. 747/AHD/2024), as well as Kolkata ITAT in the case of Sarada Mission Sevasram (ITA No. 994/KOL/2023), where similar relief was granted.

4.

The Departmental Representative (DR) was heard and did not raise any objection to remanding the matter back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

5.

Considering the submissions of the assessee, the reliance placed on judicial precedents, and the fact that the DR has not objected, we are of the view that the matter needs to be restored to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(E) is directed to consider the application on its merits, provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present its case, and allow the necessary rectification of the application form, if required, in accordance with the law.

5.1. In view of the above, the impugned order of the CIT(E) is set aside, and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after granting due opportunity to the assessee. Shri Visha Khadayata Muta Tad Kelvani Mandal

6.

In the result, the appeal is 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 →