PADMAWATI SEWA SANSTHA,SNEHA APARTMENT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CIVIC CENTRE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SH. SUDHIR KUMARAssessment Year: 2024-25
PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee is against the order 23-07-2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax
(Exemption) Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] rejecting the request for approval pertaining to assessment year 2024-25,
2
under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after, the Act].
2. The appeal is time barred by 11 days. An application has moved to condone the delay. Ground is sufficient and delay is condoned. Appeal is admitted for hearing.
3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal:
1. That on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, Hon'ble CIT (Exemption), Delhi erred in rejecting the application filed in Form10AB vide order passed under section 10AD on 23.09.2024 along with provisional registration granted under sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide UR No.
AABAP2210RE20212 valid from A.Y 2022-23 to Λ.Υ 2024-25
arbitrarily and prejudicially without considering the submission and information submitted by the appellant only on the basis of conjecture and surmises. Thus, rejection of application and cancellation of provisional registration is completely bad in law and liable to be quashed.
2. That on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, Hon'ble CIT (Exemption), Delhi erred in rejecting the 3
application filed in Form10AB vide order passed under section 10AD on 23.09.2024 along with provisional registration granted under sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide UR No.
AABAP2210RE20212 valid from A.Y 2022-23 to Λ.Υ 2024-25
without adhering to the principles of natural justice. The appellant was not provided an adequate opportunity to be heard or present their case before the rejection was made. This denial of a fair hearing constitutes a violation of the basic principles of natural justice, rendering the order unjust and unfair. Thus, rejection of application and cancellation of provisional registration is completely bad in law and liable to be quashed. 3. That the appellant craves to add, alter, delete, modify or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal.
The brief facts of the case are that appellant/assessee is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act of XXI, 1860. The assessee applied for provisional registration under section 12 A and 80G (5) of the Act on the Form 10A which was granted on 27-11-2021 from the Assessment Year 2022-23 to 4 2024-25. Thereafter the assessee applied for permanent registration under clause (iii) of the first proviso of section 80G (5) of the Act in the prescribed Form 10AB of the Income Tax Rules on 19-01-2024, The CIT(E) rejected the said application as the assessee has failed to file necessary details in support of the genuineness of the activities and the application filed under section 12A has been rejected. The Ld. CIT(E) has observed in his order as under: In response to above, the applicant submitted the reply on 15:05.2024, however the applicant again failed to submit the details of places where these activities have been carried out. The applicant also submitted the same copies of bills as submitted earlier and mentioned in para 2 above.
In view of the above, it is very much clear that, the applicant has falled to file the necessary details in support of the genuineness of the activities and other issues as discussed above. Moreover, the application filed for registration u/s 12A is also being rejected by separate order and in the absence of regular registration u/s 12A, the application filed by the 5 applicant for approval u/s 80G can not be processed, therefore, the application filed in Form 10AB for grant of approval u/s 80G(5) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, dated 19.01.2024 is hereby rejected.
Since, the application filed in Form 10AB seeking approval under section 80G (5)(iii) is rejected, the provisional registration granted vide order dated 27.11.2021 having Unique Registration Number AABAP2210RF20210 for the period from 27.11.2021 to A.Y. 2024-25 is also cancelled.
Aggrieved the order of the Ld. CIT(E) the assessee has filed this appeal before the tribunal.
The Ld. AR of the assessee has argued that the Ld. CIT (E) has wrongly cancelled the application and provisional registration without assigning any reasons. He has also submitted that the assessee has provided the documents and details of the accounts before the Ld. CIT (E ) to prove that the assessee is engaged in the charitable activities. The assessee
6
has also filed the details of the registration of the trust on Darpan Portal of Niti Aayog.
Ld. CIT -DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT (E) and sought the dismissal of the appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on the record. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR that the Ld CIT( E) has passed the order without considering the documents filed by the assessee and without discussing the details of questionnaire which he wanted to be supplied by the assessee. In the interest of justice and fair play we restore the matter back to the learned CIT( E ) to decide as a fresh after giving the opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the authority.
In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03.03.2025 ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA )
JUDICIAL MEMBER
*Neha, Sr. PS*
Date:03.03.2025