YOGVANSHAN SEVA SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

1 During the course of hearing, the bench noted that there is delay of 392 days in each appeals for which the assessee of the trust submitted that the delay in filing the appeals were due to confusion of non-clarity about the exact and right legal remedy available to the trust viz. re-apply or appeal and the time was consumed in taking correct and final advice from the counsel to file the appeal before the ITAT and further the assessee submitted that this may be treated as sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeals. To this effect, the assessee has filed affidavit deposing the above facts in the case.

2 Apropos to the grounds so raised by the assessee in ITA No. 856/JP/2025, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s claim of registration u/s 12AB of the Act by observing as under:- 4.1……. However, the applicant has failed to comply with the letters, despite being given three opportunities details of which given in para- 1. All the above details were sought in order to determine the actual working of the institution. The appellant did not furnish the sought details. The appellant has not furnished the details alngwith bill/ vouchers of expenses debited in income and expenditure account for F.Y. 2022-23. Further, the assessee was also not submitting the details of bank account and financial statement of last three financial years and details of note on activities carried out by the institution/ trust. The above details were sought from the applicant to determine the actual purpose/nature of expenditures made and to determine whether the impugned charitable activity had actually been done by the trust or not. Such type of verification is necessary to keep a check and balance on the actual working of the trust. Since, the applicant didn't furnish sought details, in the absence of such documents/ details, the justification of impugned activity could not be derived and it is not known whether the applicant is genuinely carrying out charitable activity as per its objects. Hence, the applicant has failed to justify the YOGVANSHAN SEVA SANSTHAN VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR genuineness of activities and thus falls out of the scope of registration u/s 12AB of the Act.

In view of above discussion assessee's claim of registration section 12AB is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on following grounds: -

Further 12AB (1)(b)(ii) (B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 also state that if CIT is not satisfied has to pass order rejecting such application and also cancelling its earlier registration. Thus, it is clarified that applicant's provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 10.03.2022 is also being cancelled. Further assessee has failed to give proper justification for regularization of provisional registration, thus with this order provisional registration is also cancelled.’’

2 Apropos to the ground so raised by the assessee in ITA No. 857/JP/2025, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s claim of exemption u/s 80G of the Act by observing as under:- ‘’3.6 In view of the above, the present application filed in FormNo.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80G of the Act is liable to be rejected as non- maintainable. ‘’04. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of approval u/s 80G is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on following grounds:-

3 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee in the above appeals mainly submitted that the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E) and thus the asssessee should be provided one more opportunity to contest the case before the ld. CIT(E) and to adduce the documents/ After hearing both parties and perusing the materials available on record, we noticed that the ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s claim of registration u/s 12AB of the Act. It is also noticed that the ld.CIT(E) has cancelled the provisional registration of the assessee for the reason that the assessee trust had failed to give proper justification for regularization of provisional registration. The prayer of the ld.AR of the assessee is that the assessee may be provided one more chance to adduce the desired documents before the ld. CIT(E) to resolve the issue in question. Therefore, in these circumstances, we restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) with the direction that as and when the assessee trust produces the copy of the Registration under RPT Act, 1959 and other documents required by him then the application of the assessee trust for registration u/s 12AB of the Act be decided afresh in accordance with law. The assessee trust is also directed to produce the complete Form 10AB and produce the documents relating to the genuineness of the activities etc. before the ld CIT(E) 3.6 Since we have restored the appeal of the assessee with regard to the registration u/s 12AB of the Act to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for afresh YOGVANSHAN SEVA SANSTHAN VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR adjudication, therefore, the outcome of appeal of the assessee u/s 80G of the Act is consequential in nature. 3.7 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back (supra) to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law. 4.0 In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.