SWAMINARAYAN KANYA GURUKUL FOUNDATION,RAJKOT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD
Facts
The assessee, Swaminarayan Kanya Gurukul Foundation, filed an application for registration under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected the application due to the assessee's failure to submit required documents and its non-cooperative attitude, despite multiple notices and adjournments. The assessee appealed this rejection.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's negligence in pursuing the case and failure to provide necessary documents. However, considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to pay a cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the Prime Minister Relief Fund.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the application for registration under section 80G(5)(iii) by the CIT(E) was justified, and if an opportunity should be granted to the assessee to submit the required documents.
Sections Cited
80G(5)(iii), 80G(5), 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM. &
आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM:
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the Rejection order dated 25.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad denying Registration under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
SWAMINARAYAN KANYA GURUKUL FOUNDATION ITA No. 99/RJT/2025 A Y.2024-25
Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as followed:
1) The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another. 2) On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as on the subject, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), erred in rejecting application for registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act. 3) The Ld. CIT(E) erred on facts as also in law rejecting the application for registration u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act alleging that the appellant failed to prove genuineness of activities with documentary evidenced and failed to fulfil the conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the Act, without considering the fact that the trust has already been granted certificate u/s. 12AB of the Act. the Ld. CIT(E) may kindly be directed to grant certificate of registration u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. 4) Your Honour’s appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter or withdraw any or before the hearing of appeal.
Facts of the case that the assessee filed an application for approval of the trust/institution/fund under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee filed an application electronically on 21.07.2024 to the Ld. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad. Notice was issued by the Ld. CIT(E) on 12.09.2021 requesting to furnished all documents. In response to the notice on 24.09.2024, 14.10.2024 & 29.10.2024, the assessee has filed to sought adjournment repeatedly and refrain from submitting any formal reply/document / evidence. In view of this circumstance, the present application filed in 10B for approval u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act is rejected and provisional approval also stands cancelled.
That the assessee has filed an appeal to challenge the validity of order of the Ld. CIT(E) before us on 25.12.2024.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the adjournment application was filed for hearing, the same was not considered and an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) rejecting the application u/s. 80P(5)(iii) of the Act.
SWAMINARAYAN KANYA GURUKUL FOUNDATION ITA No. 99/RJT/2025 A Y.2024-25
On the contrary, the Ld. DR for the revenue relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and requested that the cost of non-compliance by the assessee, they must be cost of every non-compliance Rs. 10,000. There were 3 non-compliance costs of Rs. 30,000/- is to be levied.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on 7. record. We noted that the several notices have been issued by the Ld. CIT(E) for hearings of the case. Since, the appellant did not submitted the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E). We further observed that the order was framed u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the I. T. Act. We note that the assessee has not gave due care and attention to the case and remain negligent in pursuing the case because of the non-cooperative attitude of the assessee in pursuing the case, we direct the assessee to deposit cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the Prime Minster Relief fund (Government of India), the receipt is to be submitted with the Registrar of this Tribunal. Keeping in view, and in the interest of justice, an opportunity is given to the assessee to produced/submit the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E), Ahmedabad. Therefore, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21/05/2025
Sd/- Sd/- ` (Dr. A.L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot (True Copy) �दनांक/ Date: 21/05/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent
SWAMINARAYAN KANYA GURUKUL FOUNDATION ITA No. 99/RJT/2025 A Y.2024-25
The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order
Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot
