NISA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

There was a delay of 2 days in filing of these appeals. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason for this ITA Nos. 1704 & 1705/Ahd/2024 [Nisa Foundation vs. CIT(E) ] - 2 –

As the issue involved in two appeals are inter-connected, they were heard together and are being disposed vide this common order.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust and had filed an application in Form 10AB for registration of the trust u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the Act, which was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E). Further, the assessee had also filed an application for approval of the trust u/s. 80G of the Act, which was also rejected for the reason that a valid registration certificate u/s.12A of the Act was a mandatory condition for according approval u/s.80G of the Act.

Aggrieved with the orders of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee has filed these appeals. The grounds taken in these two appeals are as under:

The CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts by considering one- off donations made by the Appellant in FY 2020-21, FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23 as an event of commencement of activities and rejecting the application for registration on the grounds of it being time barred.

The CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts by passing the order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard and an opportunity of filing of submission to the Appellant thereby, violating the principles of natural justice.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or at the time of passing of order in the matter.”

The CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts by summarily rejecting the Appellant's application for approval without providing any cogent reasons for rejection of application.

The CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts by passing the order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard and an opportunity of filing of submission to the Appellant thereby, violating the principles of natural justice.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or at the time of passing of order in the matter.” 6. Shri Tushar Hemani, Ld. Sr. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application for registration u/s.12A of the Act for the reason that certain corroborative evidences as called for were not submitted by the assessee. He explained that the assessee had already filed a letter dated 15.05.2024 enclosing therewith the income tax returns for the A.Ys. 2021-22, 2022-23 & 2023-24 which ITA Nos. 1704 & 1705/Ahd/2024 [Nisa Foundation vs. CIT(E) ] - 4 –

Per contra, Shri Abhay Thakur, the Ld. CIT. DR strongly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). He submitted that the details and documents as specifically called for by the Ld. CIT(E) was not filed by the assessee. Further that mere filing the copy of the income tax return did not satisfy the requirement of filing the evidence that the assessee had not claimed any exemption u/s.10(23C) or Section 11 or Section 12 of the Act for any of the previous years on or before the date of application.

We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The assessee had filed the application in Form 10AB on 05.01.2024 for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi)- Item B of the Act. The said Section is reproduced as under:

The Ld. CIT(E) found that the assessee had already commenced its activities prior to filing of the present application and, therefore, it was required to satisfy the condition as stipulated in sub-clause (B) above that no income was excluded on account of applicability of Section 10(23C) or Section 11 or Section 12 of the Act for any of the earlier previous years. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(E) had issued a show cause notice dated 08.07.2024 in this regard, to which no reply was submitted and the details as called for were also not made available by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) had held that in the absence of any details/corroborative evidences, the fulfillment of condition as mentioned in Section 12(1)(ac)(vi)-Item B had remained unverified. Therefore, he had rejected the application for registration u/s.12A of the Act.

On the other hand, the assessee has submitted that a letter dated 15.05.2024 was already filed furnishing the copy of income tax returns for A.Ys. 2021-22, 2022-23 & 2023-24 from which it was evident that the condition as stipulated in Section 12(1)(ac)(vi)-Item B was duly satisfied. A copy of the said letter dated 15.05.2024 filed before the Ld. CIT(E) has been brought on record in the paper book. It is found there from that the assessee had merely submitted a copy of income tax returns for these three years but there was no mention of satisfaction of ITA Nos. 1704 & 1705/Ahd/2024 [Nisa Foundation vs. CIT(E) ] - 6 –

In view of the above facts, we deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to allow another opportunity of being heard to the assessee to explain the fulfillment of conditions as stipulated u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi)-Item B of the Act. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) and to submit the documents and details as required by him.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 13. The Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application for approval u/s. 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the Act for the reason that registration u/s.12A of the Act was a pre-requisite condition for grant of approval. Since, the matter regarding registration u/s.12A of the ITA Nos. 1704 & 1705/Ahd/2024 [Nisa Foundation vs. CIT(E) ] - 7 –

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the combined result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.