RAJBANSHI LOK KALYAN TRUST,SIWAN vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PATNA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to furnish all the requisite documents and evidences before the CIT (Exemption), which led to the rejection of its application for regular registration. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission that it is now in a position to provide the necessary documents and that it was not granted sufficient opportunity. Considering the interest of justice and fair play, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the file of the CIT (Exemption) for fresh examination. The CIT (Exemption) is directed to verify the genuineness of the assessee's activities and the charitable nature of its objects based on the documents and evidences to be furnished by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate and file all necessary documents. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of non-compliance where the assessee expresses readiness to furnish documents and claims lack of opportunity, a remand for fresh consideration is warranted in the interest of justice, provided the assessee cooperates fully.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Rajbanshi Lok Kalyan Trust, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Patna Bench, against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Patna. The appeal was filed with a delay of 18 days, for which a petition for condonation was submitted and allowed by the Tribunal. The assessee had applied for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) read with Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after its provisional registration for Assessment Years 2022-23 to 2024-25 expired. The CIT (Exemption) had requested details of activities, annual accounts, bank statements, ledgers, and supporting evidence for receipts and expenditures. The assessee provided only the income and expenditure account for FY 2021-22 but failed to submit other required documents.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the CIT (Exemption) properly appreciated the partial compliance by the assessee and rejected the application for regular registration without granting sufficient opportunity, thereby requiring a remand for fresh consideration? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 12AB(1)(b) and principles of natural justice). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT (Exemption) did not properly appreciate the partial compliance and rejected the application without providing sufficient opportunity. The assessee is now prepared to submit all supporting evidence and documents and requested one more opportunity. Revenue's Contention: The learned Departmental Representative did not raise any serious objection to the matter being remanded back to the CIT (Exemption) for fresh consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 12AB(1)(b),Section 11,Section 2(15),Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra
Assessment Year: 2025-26 Rajbanshi Lok Kalyan Trust…..………. …………………....Appellant Jamapur, Ziradei, Siwan, Pin-841226. Bihar.. [PAN: AACTR6497G] vs. CIT (Exemption), Patna......…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Girjesh Tripathi, CA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 14, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 22, 2025 आदेश / ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Patna [in short, “CIT (Exemption)”], rejecting the assessee’s application for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) read with Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).
At the outset, the learned Authorised Representative (Ld. AR) submitted that there is a delay of 18 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. In this connection, the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay, duly supported by an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and the contents of the petition, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that there exists a reasonable cause for the delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
Brief Facts of the Case are that the assessee filed an application in Form No. 10AB seeking regular registration under clause (iii) of sub- section (1)(ac) of Section 12A, read with Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act. The said application was filed for continuation of registration earlier granted under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) vide Form No. 10AC dated 09.11.2021, which provided provisional registration for the assessment years 2022–23 to 2024–25. During the course of proceedings under Section 12AB, the learned CIT (Exemption) called upon the assessee to furnish details such as: a) Note on activities undertaken since inception, including for financial years 2021–22, 2022–23, and 2023–24, b) Annual accounts for the relevant periods, c) Copies of bank statements, ledgers, and evidences in support of the expenditure and receipts shown in the income and expenditure account. 3.1 In response, the assessee submitted only the income and expenditure account for the financial year 2021–22, but failed to furnish the bank statements, ledgers, and supporting evidences for income and expenses. On examination of the records, the learned CIT (Exemption) observed that the assessee society had not established the genuineness of its activities and that the objects of the society were not proved to be wholly charitable within the meaning of Sections 11 and 2(15) of the Act. Accordingly, the application filed in Form 10AB for grant of regular registration was rejected, and the provisional registration earlier granted under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) vide Form 10AC dated 09.11.2021 was cancelled.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that while considering the application, the CIT (Exemption) did not properly appreciate the partial compliance made by the assessee and rejected the application without granting sufficient opportunity. It was further submitted that the assessee is now in a position to file all supporting evidences and documents to substantiate the genuineness of its activities and prayed that one more opportunity be granted.
The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, did not raise any serious objection if the matter is remanded back to the CIT (Exemption) for fresh consideration.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee could not furnish all the requisite documents and evidences before the CIT (Exemption) during the registration proceedings. The application was, therefore, rejected primarily on the ground of non-compliance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the opinion that the matter requires fresh examination by the learned CIT (Exemption). The CIT (Exemption) shall verify the genuineness of activities and the charitable nature of objects based on documents and evidences to be furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the CIT (Exemption), Patna, with a direction to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate in the proceedings and file all necessary documents in support of its claim. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, with the direction to the learned CIT (Exemption) to re- examine the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3149/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3148/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- D vs Welfare Foundation, Thanevs.Income Tax…ITA 6191/MUM/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026