Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an online application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. Despite notices and a reminder, the assessee failed to provide complete documents and explanations, leading the CIT(E) to reject the application.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 68 days in filing the appeal, citing sufficient cause. The matter was restored to the file of the CIT(E) with a direction to decide the application afresh after the assessee provides the required documents, including proof of Rajasthan Public Trust Act registration and details of activities.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the registration application by the CIT(E) was justified, and whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to be heard. Also, the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12V, 12A, 147, 148, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti The CIT 717 Jat Ke Kuwa Ka Rasta, Chondpole Bazar, Vs. Exemption, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AALTS8174Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent u/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assesseeby : Mrs. Suhani Meharwal, C.A. (Thr. V.C.) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri Anup Singh, Addl.CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 30/01/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 09/04/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income (Exemption), Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(E)”] dated 31.03.2024 passed u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. On the facts and in the circumstance of case ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in passing the order of rejecting the provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of Section 12V of the Income Tax Act and also cancelling its earlier registration on the basis of :- (a) Non-registration Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. (b). working for the benefit of particular community. (c). Non-genuineness of activities and siphoning off funds of the institution whereas, no allegations were being proved on the facts hence the order is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.
1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 68 day in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an affidavit of interim President of the Samiti, Shri Dinesh Swaroop Mathur who deposed in the affidavit that he was not aware about the order passed by the ld. CIT(E) which was given by the family members of the then President Shri Govind Swaroop Mathur, on 3rd August, 2024. Thus the delay took place in filing the appeal before ITAT. The narration as made in the affidavit is as under:-
“I Dinesh Swaroop Mathur son of late Shri Bhagwan Swaroop Mathur, residence of 717 Jat Ke Kuwa Ka Rasta Chandpole Bazar Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001, do hereby solemn affirm on oath as under 1. That I am president of Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti I have been appointed as president on dated 7th July, 2024 after the sad demise of late shri Govind Swaroop Mathur, who was president of this samiti.
The order of CIT (Exemption) passed on dated 31 March, 2024, was received by the then president late shri Govind Swaroop Mathur, who kept under his safe hand and which was not known to the other office bearers of trust.
3. Before his sad demise, he was under severe medical conditions and was not able to handle even day to day work of trust.
After his demise, I was appointed interim president of the trust and thereafter I searched the order of CIT (Exemption).
I just got the order on dated 3rd August, 2024, from the family members of the then president late Shri Govind Swaroop Mathur.
3.2 The Ld. AR of the assessee appearing in this appeal submitted that the assessee is serious on the duties and the delay of 68 days is on account of medical exigency and demise of the then President of Samiti. Hence, considering the decision of the apex court in the case of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji& Others 167 ITR 471(SC) wherein it was directed the other courts to consider the liberal approach in deciding the petition for condonation as the assessee is not going to achieve any benefit for the delay. 3.3. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR objected to assessee’s application for condonation of delay and prayed that Court may decide the issue as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.
3.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted that the reasons as advanced by assessee for condonation of delay of 68 days are sufficient to condone the delay which has merit. Thus, we concur with the submission of the assessee and condone the delay of 68 days in filing the appeal by the assessee in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause.
Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed online application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was filed on 30.09.2023. A letter/notice dated 19.12.2023 was issued at the e-mail/address provided in the application requiring the assessee to submit certain documents/explanations by 29.12.2023, but no compliance was made by the assessee. Thereafter, a reminder letter was issued notice dated 10.01.2024 wherein date of hearing was fixed as 19.01.2024. In response to the above, the assessee had filed its reply which was duly examined in length & few discrepancies were found. In this regard, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee notice dated 29.02.2024 to submit the required details/information on or before 07.03.2024. In compliance to thereof, the assessee had furnished its reply which was examined on record, but not found tenable by the ld. CIT(E). Conclusively, it is noted that the ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application by observing as under:- ‘’04. In view of above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB is liable to be rejected and thus being rejected on following grounds:-
Registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. Working for the benefit of Kayasth Samaj Non-Genuineness of activities and siphoning off funds for the institution Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti 0.5 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 04-04-2023 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 lapsed and cancelled.’’
4. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee mainly submitted that the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E) and thus the order should be quashed being ex-parte order and against the principles of natural justice. Further, the ld. AR of the assessee stated at Bar that the assessee trust is particularly of Kayasth Samaj and the assessee trust is in the process of applying the registration under RPT Act before the competent authority and it is likely to get the same. Conclusively, the ld AR of the assessee prayed that the assessee trust may be provided one more opportunity to the contest the case before the ld CIT(E) and restore the appeal to the file of ld CIT(E) for afresh adjudication as the assessee was ex-parte before the ld. CIT(E)
5. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(E).
Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti 6 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 on following grounds:- Registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. Working for the benefit of Kayasth Samaj Non-Genuineness of activities and siphoning off funds for the institution 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. It may be noted that the ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee trust has applied for registration under RPT Act, 1959 before the competent authority and the assessee trust is likely to get the same. . 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 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 working benefit of Kayasth Samaj and genuineness of the activities and siphoning off funds of the institution before the ld CIT(E)
Shree Chitra Gupta Samuhik Vivah Samiti 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. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/04/2025.