SAI INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT,MAYURBHANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), CUTTACK, CUTTACK
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(E) rejecting their application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that they were not given sufficient opportunity to present their case and documents. The revenue argued that adequate opportunities were provided.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee was given only two opportunities to provide documents and a detailed reply. The CIT(E) rejected the application based on the observation that no substantial charitable activities were being carried out. However, in the interest of natural justice, the appeal was restored.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration under Section 12AB without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
250, 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK” BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
Per Bench :
The captioned appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyd [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(E)”] vide order no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024- 25/1071020344(1) dated 09.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2025-26.
Shri P. K. Mishra & Shri Himanshu Jena, Shri Narahari Swain, Advocates represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT, DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
2 ITA No.88/CTK/2025 Sai Institute of Information Technology & Management, AY 2025-26
It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee in Form 10AB for registration u/s. 12AB of the Act without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee. It was also submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has also rejected the application for registration of the assessee without appreciating the facts. It was, thus, submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the issue afresh enabling the assessee to file the relevant documents to substantiate its claim before the Ld. CIT(E).
In reply, the Ld. CIT, DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by the authority below. It was submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) deserves to be upheld.
5 We have heard rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(E) clearly shows that the assessee was provided only two opportunities to produce the copy of memorandum of Association/Trust deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for in the said notice. It was also found that the Ld. CIT(E) on the information and documents available on record has observed in the impugned order that no substantial activities which are charitable in nature are being carried out by the assessee, which is in violation of the provisions of the section 12AB of the Act. In view of the above, the rejected the assessee’s application in Form 10AB for registration. That being so, in the interest of natural justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for re-adjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to produce all the documentary evidence to substantiate its case during the course of re-adjudication proceeding before the Ld. CIT(E) positively.
3 ITA No.88/CTK/2025 Sai Institute of Information Technology & Management, AY 2025-26
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajesh Kumar) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 9th April, 2025
JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Sai Institute of Information Technology & Management 2. Respondent – CIT(E), Hyderabad 3. Pr. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 5. Guard file.
