DARUL ULUM HAJRAT ABUBKAR SIDDIK,SATARA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 426/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 December 2022AY 2021-224 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(Exemption)'s order and remanded the case for de novo adjudication. The assessee was directed to file all relevant documents before the CIT(Exemption), who was also instructed to provide an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's registration under Section 12AA was cancelled by the CIT(Exemption) for failing to produce relevant documents to prove the genuineness of the trust's objects and activities. The assessee requested another opportunity to submit these documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) erred in cancelling the registration without providing sufficient opportunity for the assessee to submit required documents and prove the genuineness of the trust's activities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chaturvedi – AR
For Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel CIT(DR)
Hearing: 07/12/2022Pronounced: 13/12/2022

ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune dated 15.01.2021 under section 12AA(1)(b)(ii) of the Act. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Pune erred in rejecting/cancelling the registration u/s 12AA of the Act and ought to have restored the appellant’s trust registration u/s 12AA dated 21.03.2017.

2. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Pune failed to appreciate the facts that the Appellant Trust has made application u/s 10A following the new procedure laid down for re-registration u/s 12AB (which was made effected from 01.04.2021), on 18.06.2020 itself due to anxiety and uncertainty which everyone was facing in a time of COVID-19 and not for registration of trust when there is a modification in object of trust after 12AA registration. Darul Ulum Hajrat Abukar Siddik [A]

3. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Pune failed to appreciate that when the date of Trust deed mentioned in Form 10A was of 29.10.2007 and the registration u/s 12AA was granted on 21.03.2017 so there cannot be any modification on 29.10.2007 after registration of trust u/s 12AA.

4. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Pune ought to have communicated the notices through e-mail or any other mode to make sure the service on Appellant Trust instead of just putting the notices on the e-filing portal. 5. The Ld. CIT (Exemption), Pune should not have taken the benefit of apparent mistake made by the Appellant Trust in filing the application under wrong provision of the act and ought to have not cancelled the registration u/s 12AA. 6. The order of CIT (Exemption), Pune u/s 12AA( 1 )(b)(ii) may please be set aside and existing registration u/s 12AA as per certificate dated 21.03.2017 may please be restored. 7. The appellant crave to add, delete, amend, alter or replace any of the above grounds as and when advised.” 2. At the outset of hearing, the ld.Authorised Representative (ld.AR) for the assessee requested the Bench to provide one more opportunity to submit objects and activities to prove the genuineness of the Trust before the ld.CIT(E).

3.

On the other hand, the ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue did not object to the request of the assessee.

4.

We have heard both the parties. The ld.CIT(E) has observed in the order that the assessee had not produced the relevant documents which were called by the ld.CIT(E). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ananda Social & Education Trust vs. CIT [2020] 114 taxmann.com 693 (SC) has observed as under :

2 Darul Ulum Hajrat Abukar Siddik [A] “11. The purpose of section 12AA of the Act is to enable registration only of such trust or institution whose objects and activities are genuine. In other words, the Commissioner is bound to satisfy himself that the object of the Trust are genuine and that its activities are in furtherance of the objects of the Trust, that is equally genuine.

12.

Since section 12AA pertains to the registration of the Trust and not to assess of what a trust has actually done, we are of the view that the term ‘activities; in the provision includes ‘proposed activities’. That is to say, a Commissioner is bound to consider whether the objects of the Trust are genuinely charitable in nature and whether the activities which the Trust proposed to carry on are genuine in the sense that they are in line with the objects of the Trust. Similarly, the situation would be different where the trust has before applying for registration found to have under taken activities contrary to the objects of the Trust.”

5.

Thus, the ld.CIT(E) is bound to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the objects of the trust and activities of the trust. Since in this case the assessee has failed to file the documents, the ld.CIT(E) could not verify genuineness of the objects and activities of the Trust. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it is set-aside to ld.CIT(E) for denovo adjudication. The assessee is directed to file all the relevant documents before the ld.CIT(E). The ld.CIT(E) shall give the opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

3 Darul Ulum Hajrat Abukar Siddik [A]

6.

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

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →