NISWARTH WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 119/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 April 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remanded both applications back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration, instructing to provide another reasonable opportunity to the applicant. The tribunal also imposed costs of Rs. 1,000/- on the appellant-society for non-compliance with previous notices.

What were the facts?

The appellant-society filed applications for registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with the CIT(E). Both applications were rejected by the CIT(E) on grounds including incomplete Form 10AB, non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and non-genuineness of activities.

What were the issues?

Rejection of applications for registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on incomplete documentation, non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, and alleged non-genuineness of activities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR

Before: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM

Hearing: 03/04/2025Pronounced: 07/04/2025

vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER .

This common order is to dispose of the above captioned 2 appeals filed by the appellant-society, before Learned CIT(E). Vide two separate orders, two separate applications filed by the appellant before Ld. CIT(E) came to be rejected on separate grounds. One of the applications was submitted seeking its registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) The other application was submitted seeking its registration u/s 80G of the Act.

12AB of the Act This application came to be rejected on the following three grounds:-  Incomplete Form 10AB.  Non-registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959.  Non-Genuineness of Activities.

Non registration of the applicant under RPT Act, 1959 4. As noticed above, this is one of the grounds of rejection of the application. In this regard, it may be mentioned here that Co-ordinate Bench ITAT, Jaipur has held in APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust vs. CIT(E) decided on 15.01.2025 that for the purposes of registration of such institutions, u/s 12AB of the Act, registration under RPT Act, 1959 is not one of the essential requirements.

5.

A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that Learned CIT(E) observed therein as to which the documents were not furnished by the & 110/JPR/2025 Niswarth Welfare Society vs. CIT(E) applicant initially with the application in Form 10AB and also in reply to letter dated 08.09.2024 issued by Learned CIT(E).

6.

As regards non furnishing of the documents, Ld. AR for the appellant candidly admits default on the part of the appellant. He submits that the applicant could not furnish the requisite details/documents inadvertently, as the Secretary of the society, whose e-mail address and merely PAN number were furnished on the income tax portal, did not check e-mail account as well as SMC. At the same time, Ld. AR submits that the matter be remanded to Learned CIT(E) for decision of the application afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity to the applicant of being heard.

7.

Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted affidavit of Shri Gaurav Sharma, Secretary of the appellant society.

8.

Ld. DR for the department has not controverted the above affidavit. 9 As is available from the impugned order, notices dated 08.09.2024, 26.10.2024 and 08.11.2024 were issued by the office of Learned CIT(E) to the applicant asking the applicant for certain details/information/documents.

& 110/JPR/2025 Niswarth Welfare Society vs. CIT(E) In the given situation, we are of the view that the application deserves to be decided after providing another opportunity to the applicant of being heard. 10. Accordingly, Learned CIT(E), for decision of the application u/s 12AB of the Act afresh after providing another opportunity to the applicant of being heard.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →