PYDAH VENKATA NARAYANA SUSEELA RAGHAVA RATNAMMA ACADEMY OF EDUCATION,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), RAJAHMUNDRY
Facts
The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The Ld.CIT(E) issued notices for documentary evidence regarding charitable activities, to which the assessee partially responded. Subsequently, the Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application, stating that the charitable activities were not justified by verifiable documentary evidence.
Held
The Tribunal found the Ld.CIT(E)'s rejection order to be non-speaking, lacking specific reasons for the denial. Citing natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Ld.CIT(E) to provide the assessee another opportunity to furnish all required documents and pass a fresh speaking order on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB by the CIT(E) was valid when it was based on a non-speaking order and without affording a complete opportunity to the assessee to provide documentary evidence for its charitable activities.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(ii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against rejection order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(E)”] vide DIN & Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-
I.T.A.No.345/VIZ/2025 Pydah Venkata Narayana Suseela Raghava Ratnamma Academy of Education 25/1075338981(1) dated 31.03.2025 seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’).
Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee has filed an e-application in Form No.10AB seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. The Ld.CIT(E) issued notices to the assessee in respect of proceedings under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act to produce the copy of Memorandum of Association/Trust Deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for in the said notice. In response, assessee has submitted some of the details as called for. Subsequently, another notice dated 07.02.2025 was issued to the assessee to submit the full information as per the notices issued. In response, assessee furnished its reply in compliance to the notice issued by the Ld.CIT(E). On a perusal of the submissions of the assessee, Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application filed in Form-10AB for registration under section 12AB of the Act.
Aggrieved by the rejection order, assessee filed an appeal before us and raised following grounds in its appeal: -.
“1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is not justified in rejecting the application filed by the appellant for renewal of registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.”
Page. No 2
I.T.A.No.345/VIZ/2025 Pydah Venkata Narayana Suseela Raghava Ratnamma Academy of Education 4. The only issue contested by the assessee is with respect to rejection of the Registration under section 12AB of the Act by the Ld.CIT(E).
At the outset, Ld. Authorized Representative (hereinafter in short “Ld.AR”] submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has not passed a speaking order for the denial of registration to the assessee. He further submitted that various documentary evidences have been provided before Ld. CIT(E) but he has casually observed that the charitable activities are not justified with verifiable documentary evidences. He therefore pleaded that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to submit its reply with documentary evidences once again to the Ld.CIT(E).
On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld. DR”] heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(E).
We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The assessee responded to the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(E) but it is observed from the order of the Ld.CIT(E) that the assessee has partly responded. We find that Ld. CIT(E) while rejecting the application in Form10AB for the purpose of Registration of the society under section 12AB of the Act has observed as follows: - “3. On perusal of the submissions made by the assessee, it is observed that the charitable activities are not justified with verifiable documentary evidence which is in violation of the provisions of the section 12AB of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee obtained regular registration uls 12AB in form 10AD dated 17.03.2023 valid from AY 2021-22 to AY 2025-26. The Page. No 3
I.T.A.No.345/VIZ/2025 Pydah Venkata Narayana Suseela Raghava Ratnamma Academy of Education assessee further made application in form 10AB on21.09.2024 for renewal of registration u/s 12AB. In view of the above, the present application in form 10AB for renewal registration u/s 12AB is herewith rejected.” 8. On a perusal of the Ld. CIT(E) order, we find that he has not discussed anything except stating that the charitable activities are not justified with verifiable documentary evidences. Ld. CIT(A) has not specified how and which of the assessee’s activities cannot be deciphered as charitable in nature. Ld.CIT(E) has simply rejected the assessee’s application which, in our considered opinion is not correct. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, we find it appropriate to grant another one more opportunity to the assessee to submit the relevant documents including the evidences as detailed in the notices. Accordingly, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee and thereby set-aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of Ld.CIT(E) with a direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish required details and to decide the case on merits by passing a speaking order. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate and furnish necessary documents / information as required by the Ld.CIT(E).
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th August, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (रिीश सूद) (एस बालाकृष्णन) (RAVISH SOOD) (S. BALAKRISHNAN) न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 29.08.2025 Giridhar, Sr.PS Page. No 4
I.T.A.No.345/VIZ/2025 Pydah Venkata Narayana Suseela Raghava Ratnamma Academy of Education आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee : Pydah Venkata Narayana Suseela Raghava Ratnamma Academy of Education Door No. 20-1-65, Dhriti Nivas Kakinada – 533001
रधजस्व/ The Revenue : Income Tax Officer-Exemption Ward Income Tax Officer Aayakar Bhavan, Kambala Cheruvu Veerabhadrapuram Rajahmundry – 533105 Andhra Pradesh 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकरअपीलीयअनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम /DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam
Page. No 5
