SANSKRIT BHARTI,KURUKSHETRA vs. CIT EXEMPTION,, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 172/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 July 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should have been given a final and reasonable opportunity to comply, considering the genuine personal tragedy faced by the AR and the principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application as the assessee failed to provide required documents and explanations despite multiple notices. The assessee's earlier AR faced a personal tragedy, hindering their ability to respond.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration application without affording a final reasonable opportunity to the assessee, especially given the personal circumstances of the authorized representative?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh whereby the application of the assessee seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rejected.

2.

At the outset, the Registry has pointed out a delay of 03 days in filing the appeals. After considering the condonation application and finding sufficient cause demonstrated therein, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

The assessee had filed an application in Form No. 10AB on 26.06.2024 seeking registration under section 12AB. During the proceedings before the CIT(E), multiple notices were issued on 10.10.2024, 07.11.2024, and 19.11.2024 seeking detailed clarifications and documentary evidences to verify the genuineness of the activities and compliance with the objects of the trust.

4.

The Ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee failed to file the requisite responses to the notices issued and therefore concluded that the assessee

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →