SHRI VATESHVAR SHIKSHAN PRASARAK SANSTHA,NASHIK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(Exemption)'s order, stating the assessee should not be precluded from a hearing on merits. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(Exemption) for a fresh disposal.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a trust, applied for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application due to incomplete submissions, without deciding on the trust's objects.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the registration application without a proper hearing on merits. Whether the appeal was time-barred and if condonation was appropriate.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”
Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune passed under section 12AA(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter also called as “the Act”] dated 31.08.2019.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust who E-filed an online application in Form 10A for approval of the Trust/Institution under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 20.02.2019. The assessee trust is registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The relevant details namely Trust Deed/MoA were Shri Vateshvar Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha, Nashik Vs. CIT(Exemption) [A] also uploaded by the assessee. The ld.CIT(E) asked the assessee to upload certain information/clarification in order to process the application. However, the ld.CIT(Exemption) observed that submission uploaded by assessee was incomplete, hence, the ld.CIT(E) rejected application for the grant of registration under section 12AA(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(Exemption), the assessee has approached the Tribunal.
The appeal is time barred by 455 days. The assessee appeal is condoned since falling in the Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period. We, therefore, admit the appeal, for adjudication.
We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant material on record. On perusal of the order of the ld.CIT(E), it is an admitted position that the ld.CIT(E) has not decided issue on objects, instead, he dismissed the appeal ex-parte. Therefore, the assessee, in our view, should not be precluded an opportunity of hearing on merits. In view of the aforementioned reasons, we set-aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(E) with a direction to dispose of the application afresh on merits as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Shri Vateshvar Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha, Nashik Vs. CIT(Exemption) [A]
More judgments on Section 12A
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026