VIDHYADHAR NAGAR SHRI SWETAMBER JAN KALYAN SANSTHA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

Vidhyadhar Nagar Shri Swetamber Jan The CIT Exemption Jaipur. Kalyan Sanstha Vs. Vidhyadhar nagar SS Sanjay GA 95, Opp, Laxmi Clinic Bhawani Nagar, Sikar Road, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFAV6266P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Shri Shailesh Manstri, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 18/02/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 01 /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 [herein after referred to as “ld.CIT(E)”] dated 29.09.2024 thereby rejecting the registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”).

Vidhyadhar nagar Shri Swetamber Jan Kalyan Sanstha vs. CIT(E) “1. That the Ld. CIT(E), Jaipur, has erred in facts and in law by cancelling the application u/s 12A(1)(ii)(B) for permanent registration and also cancelling the provisional approval under section 12A(1)9ac)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961.

2. That the appellant craves to add, amend, and alter the grounds before or at the time of appellate hearing.”

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 unde4r clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06-04-2022 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 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 Jain Community 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 Vidhyadhar nagar Shri Swetamber Jan Kalyan Sanstha vs. CIT(E) 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). 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  Object for the benefit of particular community.

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 Vidhyadhar nagar Shri Swetamber Jan Kalyan Sanstha vs. CIT(E) to produce the complete Form 10AB and produce the documents relating to the genuineness of the activities etc. before the ld CIT(E) 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.