DR B.R AMBEDKAR SEVA ANATHA ASHRAM,KALAHANDI, ODISHA vs. ITO, WARD-EXEMPTION, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR, ODISHA
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT (Exemption) denying registration under section 12A and recognition under section 80G. The assessee contended that the wrong section code was chosen for the 12A registration, and the CIT did not allow rectification.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee had indeed chosen the wrong code for the Section 12A registration. In the interest of justice, the matters were restored to the file of the CIT (Exemption) for re-adjudication and to grant the assessee an opportunity to rectify the mistakes. The issue of 80G recognition was also to be considered subsequently.
Key Issues
Whether the denial of registration under Section 12A and recognition under Section 80G was justified, especially when the assessee claimed inadvertent error in selecting the wrong code for application and sought rectification.
Sections Cited
12A, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK” BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK” BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA Nos. 154 & 155/CTK/2025 (Assessment Year: 2025-26) Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Seva Anatha Income Tax officer, Ashram, Ward (Exemption), Pandkul Kumari, Golamunda, ACIT, Range-1, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kalahandi-766029, Odisha Ainthapali, Sambalpur-768004, Odisha (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAAAD6491K Assessee by : Shri Sakshi Aggarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, DR Date of hearing: 22.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 22.07.2025
O R D E R PER PENCH: These are two appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Learned CIT (Exemption) in DIN & Notie No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071108884(1) & ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071213023(1) dated 11.12.2024 & 13.12.2024 in respect of the registration under section 12A and recognition under section 80G.
Shri Sakshi Aggarwal, represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, represented on behalf of the Revenue.
It was submitted by the Learned AR that in respect of the registration under Section 12A, the Learned CIT (E) has denied assessee the registration on the ground that the request for grant of regular registration was made through e-proceedings and the wrong section
In reply, the Learned CIT DR agreed to the proposal that the issues will be restored to the file of the Learned CIT (E) so that the assessee can rectify the defects.
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has chosen the wrong code for the registration under Section 12A, in the interest of justice, the issues in both these appeals are restored to the file of the Learned CIT (E) for re-adjudication and to grant the assessee adequate opportunity to rectify the mistakes, if any, in the application for registration under Section 12A. Subsequent to the issue of the registration under Section 12A, the issue of 80G is also to be considered by the learned CIT (E) after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 22.07.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
