SRI VINAYAKA CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) , BANGALORE
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, sought registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application, citing non-appearance and failure to submit documents. The assessee contended they had appeared, submitted documents, and informed about their temporary departure from India.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had indeed responded to notices and appeared. However, due to the temporary absence of the authorized representative and the issuance of a show cause notice during this period, a proper reply was not filed. The Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB was justified due to the assessee's inability to appear in person and submit documents on certain dates.
Sections Cited
12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE
BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 1801/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : NA
M/s. Sri Vinayaka Charitable Trust, The S7 2nd Floor, Swastik Commissioner of Manandi Arcade, Income Tax SC Road, Seshadripuram, (Exemptions), Bangalore – 560 020. Bangalore. Vs. PAN: ABETS9981M APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT-DR
Date of Hearing : 08-01-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 27-01-2026
ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the rejection order of the Ld.CIT(E) dated 24/06/2025 in which the registration sought for u/s. 12AB has been rejected and raised the following grounds: “1. The Appellant responded to all the notices issued to him explaining his inability to appear in person and submit the details called for as had left India on 8th April 2025 and would appear in person on his return in July 2025. 2. In response to the Notice of 11th June 2025 requesting him to appear in person on 18th June 2025, the Appellant did appear in person and submitted all documents which were duly verified and Signed by both the parties.
Page 2 of 4 ITA No. 1801/Bang/2025 3. Hence the order rejecting registration under 12 AB for nonappearance and not submitting details is grossly unjust as the Appellant did respond to all the Notices and did appear in person on the appointed date and complied with the requirements. 4. The rejection of Registration is arbitrary and unjust and devoid any merit and grossly injustice to the Appellant. 5. Hence your Appellant prays that the unjust order be set aside and registration be granted.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust and sought for registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. The Ld.CIT(E) has issued a notice dated 22/05/2025. The assessee appeared and filed the details as requested by the Ld.CIT(E) and further informed that he would leave India on 08/04/2025 and would return to India only in July, 2025. But unfortunately, the Ld.CIT(E) had issued a show cause notice on 11/06/2025 fixing the date of hearing on 18/06/2025. Since the authorised representative is not in India, proper reply to the show cause notice could not be filed and therefore the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the said application for the reason that the assessee had not responded to the notices issued and submitting the necessary documents as required for registration u/s. 12AB of the Act.
As against the said rejection order, the present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal.
At the time of hearing, the neither the Ld.AR nor the assessee appeared before us. Therefore we have considered the submission made by the assessee in the grounds and decided the appeal on the basis of the said grounds. The assessee submitted that they had responded to the notices and details were also filed before him and also informed that he would leave India on 08/04/2025 and would return India in July, 2025. Further, to the notice dated 11/06/2025, the assessee submitted that they appeared in person and submitted all the documents which were duly verified by the Ld.CIT(E) and therefore the impugned order alleging that the assessee had
Page 3 of 4 ITA No. 1801/Bang/2025 not appeared and not furnished the required documents is against the facts of the case and the same should be set aside.
The Ld.DR relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.
It is the case of the assessee that, to all the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(E), the assessee had appeared and submitted the details as called for by him and also informed that the trustee would leave India on 08/04/2025 and would be back only in the month of July, 2025. Anyhow to the show cause notice issued on 11/06/2025, the assessee submitted that they had appeared before the Ld.CIT(E) and filed various documents but without considering the documents furnished at the time of appearance, the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the said application as if the assessee had not appeared and not produced any documents in support of the case. In the interest of justice we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to appear before the Ld CIT(E). We therefore set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and remit this issue to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for denovo consideration, after hearing the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th January, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Vice President Judicial Member
Bangalore, Dated, the 27th January, 2026. /MS /
Page 4 of 4 ITA No. 1801/Bang/2025 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A)
By order
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore
