ORIYA SAMAJ NAGPUR,NAGPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION , PUNE, NAGPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal noted that the assessee's application was rejected due to non-response to notices, without deciding on merits. The tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee is given an opportunity to be heard and to present all relevant documents.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against the cancellation of provisional registration and approval by the CIT(E). The assessee contended they were not given adequate opportunity to be heard due to circumstances beyond their control and sought remittance back to the CIT(E).
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) rightly rejected the application for registration and approval due to non-appearance without providing adequate opportunity of hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY
ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : The assessee has filed the above two appeals against the respective separate orders of the learned CIT(E), Pune in cancelling the provisional registration and approval u/sec.12AB r.w.s.12A(1)(ac)(vi) and u/sec.80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], vide orders both dated 11.03.2024 respectively.
During the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee, submitted that the assessee has not been provided with 2 ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 adequate opportunity of hearing to put forth his case and the documents placed on record were also not properly appreciated by the learned CIT(E) and rejected the application and approval of the assessee society due to non-appearance. He submitted that the assessee society could not appear before the learned CIT(E) due to the circumstances beyond it’s control. He submitted that the assessee-society has got fair chances to get approval and registration, if one more opportunity has been provided to the assessee-society to substantiate it’s case. He submitted that assessee-society is ready to submit all the relevant details as called for by the learned CIT(E) and prayed that the matter in issues may be remitted back to the file of learned CIT(E) in the larger interest of justice.
The Learned DR on the other hand strongly opposed the request of the assessee to remit the issues back to the file of learned CIT(E). He submitted that despite service of notice the assessee is not responded and therefore, the learned CIT(E) has rightly rejected the application for registration and approval under the Act.
We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record. We find that it is an admitted 3 ITA.Nos.289 & 290/NAG./2024 fact that the assessee-society has been granted provisional registration and approval by the department. Since the assessee society could not respond to the notice(s) issued by the learned CIT(E), he rejected the application for registration and approval u/secs.12AA and sec.80G(5) of the Act, respectively, without deciding issue(s) on merits. We, therefore, in the larger interest of justice, remit the issue of registration u/sec.12AA and approval u/sec.80G(5) of the Act back to the file of learned CIT(E), for his afresh adjudication as per fact and law, by providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee society is directed to furnish all the documents before the learned CIT(E) to adjudicate the matter in issue without taking adjournment under any pretext. We hold and direct accordingly.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.01.2025.
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026