Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Shri Tulsi Mahapragya Chetna Evam Sewa Trust, applied for final approval under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application citing non-compliance and incomplete information, despite providing two opportunities to the assessee.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted a reply, though it was considered incomplete by the CIT(E). To ensure substantial justice and provide a proper opportunity, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after allowing the assessee to make further submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the assessee's application for final approval under Section 80G without fully considering the submissions made and providing adequate opportunity to furnish complete information.
Sections Cited
80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
This appeal relating is filed by assessee against order bearing DIN: ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071418668(1) dated 20.12.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal [“CIT(E)”] by which the assessee’s application for grant of final approval u/s 80G of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the act”] has been rejected. The assessee has raised the grounds as mentioned in Appeal Memos (Form No. 36).
We have heard learned Representatives of both sides and carefully perused the case record.
At first, we re-produce the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(E):
Annexure (mentioned in row-9 above) A query latter dated 24/10/2024 has been issued to the assessee regarding to furnish all the information/documents on before 08/11/2024. Then assessee society fails to avails the opportunity on the above mentioned date and no reply was furnished. Subsequently a second opportunity was given to the society vide letter dated 11/11/2024 regarding to furnish complete information/documents on or before 19/11/2024. In response to the above notices the assessee society submitted his reply alongwith documents. During the examination of the information/documents submitted by the assessee society it is observed that no specific expenditure is debited in the P&L account regarding charitable activities as per object of the society during the F.Y. 2021-2282022-23. Also it found that after giving two opportunity the assesse fails to furnish complete information as per original a query letter date 24/10/2024
In view of above, due to non-compliance of required documents/information filed by the assessee, the application of the assessee in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s 80G of I.T Act is hereby rejected. VIJAY KUMAR SONI CIT EXEMPTION BHOPAL 4. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has given only two opportunities to assessee vide notices dated 24.10.2024 & 11.11.2024 by giving hearings on 08.11.2024 & 19.11.2024 respectively. While it is true that the assessee could not respond on first hearing but, however, the assessee e-filed a reply dated 19.11.2024 to CIT(E) in response to notice of Page 2 of 5 second hearing, copy of e-filing acknowledgement downloaded from departmental website is filed at Pages 5-6 of Paper-Book. He submitted that the CIT(E), in first sentence of second para of impugned order, acknowledged assessee’s reply but, however, observed that the assessee did not furnish complete information as required. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has already filed various documents to CIT(E) in the reply dated 19.11.2024 and further ready and willing to represent its case for full satisfaction of CIT(E). Therefore, in the interest of justice one more opportunity must be given to assessee and this matter needs to be restored back at the level of CIT(E) for consideration afresh.
Replying to same, Ld. DR for revenue opposed the request of Ld. AR.
He submitted that the CIT(E) issued two notices and asked assessee to submit details/documents but the assessee did not furnish required details/documents and it was a failure of assessee. He submitted that the CIT(E) has a limited time to pass order within 6 months and had no option except to reject assessee’s application when the assessee did not file the details/documents for satisfaction of CIT(E). He submitted that the CIT(E)’s order is perfect in the situation and must be upheld.
We have considered rival submissions of both sides and carefully perused the impugned order as well as the documents held in Paper-Book filed. After a careful consideration, we find that the CIT(E) has given only two opportunities to assessee and admittedly the assessee has filed reply to CIT(E) also which is acknowledged by CIT(E). However, the CIT(E) has Page 3 of 5 considered assessee’s reply as not giving complete information and therefore rejected assessee’s application. But the assessee is ready to make further submissions for the satisfaction of CIT(E). Therefore, in order to grant substantial justice to assessee, we agree to the request made by Ld. AR for assessee and restore this case at the level of CIT(E) for adjudication afresh.
Needless to mention that the CIT(E) shall give necessary opportunity to assessee and the assessee shall avail those opportunities and that the CIT(E) shall pass order judiciously without being influenced by his earlier order in any manner.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 25/11/2025