G.N. AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2445/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 January 20262 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had previously shown inability to produce documents but requested a further opportunity. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues in both appeals to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, with directions to grant the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust's application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval under section 80G was dismissed by the CIT(E) through separate orders. The assessee contended that insufficient opportunity of being heard was provided, while the CIT-DR argued that proper opportunities were given, but the assessee failed to produce required documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee trust was denied sufficient opportunity of being heard before its application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval under section 80G was dismissed by the CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AR, Shri Satyajit Mandal, CIT-DR
For Respondent: Shri Satyajit Mandal, CIT-DR
Hearing: 01/01/2026Pronounced: 01/01/2026

Per Bench : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Id. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata, both dated 16.08.2025 & 24.08.2025. 2. It was submitted by the Id. AR that the Id. CIT(E) has dismissed the application filed by the assessee trust for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act and approval u/s.80G of the Act without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the submission that the matter may be restored to the file of Id. CIT(E) to decide the issue afresh enabling the assessee to file the relevant documents to substantiate its claim before the Id. CIT(E).

3.

In reply, Id CIT-DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by the Id. CIT(E). It was submitted that the order passed by the Id. CIT(E) deserve to be upheld.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. On perusal of the impugned orders in both the appeals of the assessee, it is found that the assessee-trust has already shown its inability to produce the documents as required by the Id. CIT(E), however, during the course of hearing, Id. AR submitted that one more opportunity be provided to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the Id. CIT(E). In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the issues in both the appeals appeal are restored to the file of the Id. CIT(E) for readjudication the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

5.

In the result, both appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/01/2026. (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यायिक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; दिनांक Dated 01/01/2026 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त (अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यापित प्रति //// (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii)

All 679 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →