Loading judgment…
Facts
The Al Falah Social Welfare Society's application for regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) was rejected by the CIT (Exemption) due to alleged non-compliance with information requests. The appellant filed the appeal with a significant delay of 639 days, attributing the delay to their previous tax consultant's failure to communicate the rejection order. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application after the appellant failed to respond to notices seeking information regarding the genuineness of its activities.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 639-day delay in filing the appeal, accepting the reasons provided in the affidavit as 'reasonable cause'. The matter was remitted back to the CIT (Exemption) for de novo consideration of the application, with directions to provide the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The appellant was instructed to update contact details and remain vigilant in future proceedings.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CIT (Exemption) was justified in rejecting the application for regular registration under section 12A due to non-compliance. 2. Whether the delay of 639 days in filing the appeal should be condoned. 3. Whether the appellant should be granted a fresh opportunity to present their case for registration.
Sections Cited
Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), Section 12AB(1)(b)(i), Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of appellant is directed against the order dated 28.08.2023 framed by CIT (Exemption), Pune denying application filed on Form No.10AB for grant of regular registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal :
“1. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; erred in law and on facts in rejecting appellant's application for registration u/s 12A of ITA, 1961.
2. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; ought to have appreciated that appellant's activities are genuine and bonafide, and as such, eligible for registration u/s 12A of ITA, 1961.
Appellant contends that, better reasonable opportunity of being heard ought to have been extended to the appellant, to submit the details/information. Appellant contends that, Appellant is keen to ensure complete and total compliance as so required, and the present situation is simply a fall-out of communication gap.
4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter, clarify, explain, modify, delete any or all of the grounds of appeal, and to seek any just and fair relief.”
3. Registry has informed that there is delay of 639 days respectively in filing the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Appellant has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay and the same reads as follows :
“Reasons for delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A):
Appellant Trust was initially unaware of the rejection order dated 28/08/2023, as it was communicated to the email ID of the erstwhile appellant's tax handling Id. CIT(E) "sskshiruroffice10@gmail.com", who missed the receipt of the Rejection consultant Order. the before matter the
6. As none of the members of the Appellant Trust are aware of Income tax proceedings, procedures, etc, we were completely dependent on the tax consultant for all Income Tax matters.
The failure of the tax consultant to communicate the passing of the order to us was an inadvertent lapse on the part of the consultant, attributable to the unusually high volume of email correspondence received during the relevant period.
8. Subsequently, the tax consultant became aware of the rejection order passed, when the assessment order u/s 143(3) on 05/02/2025 for AY 2023-24, which was communicated to the email address of the appellant i.e. alfalahned@gmail.com.
9. Accordingly, we were informed of the assessment order and the previously issued rejection order.
The Appellant Trust then promptly took steps to initiate the appeal process.
The previous tax consultant advised the Appellant Trust to appoint a tax consultant in Pune to assist in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune.
Upon appointment, the newly engaged consultant promptly advised initiating appeal proceedings before this Hon'ble Tribunal and requested relevant documents and information pertaining to the appellant's operations, which were essential for the preparation and filing of the appeal.
The appellant's tax consultant immediately took requisite action and compiled by filing the appeal and sent the relevant documents for signing. Further, due to the logistic issue of distance between Pune and Nanded, the providing of documents and signing of appeal, precious time to file an appeal was unfortunately lost and a delay has crept into the matter.
As the delay in filing the appeal was purely un-intentional and does not involve any legal issue or contention, request your goodself to kindly condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits.
All the above stated facts and details and true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.”
After hearing both the sides and perusing the averments made in the affidavit, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the appellant in filing the instant appeal within the stipulated time. We find the delay in filing the appeal is not intentional and appellant would not have gained by delaying the filing of appeal. We therefore taking justice oriented approach and following the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 639 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.
5. Tersely stated, the common facts emanating from the record are that the appellant is a society engaged in charitable activities. Provisional registration to the appellant was granted on 26.11.2021. Pursuant to provisional registration, the appellant filed application on Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act on 31.03.2023. In order to verify the genuineness of activities of the appellant trust, the ld. CIT (Exemption) issued notice dt. 24.06.2023 through ITBA portal calling upon the appellant trust to file certain information/clarification. Another notice dated 24.07.2023 was also issued by the ld.CIT( Exemption). There was no compliance from the side of appellant. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT(Exemption) rejected the application filed for grant of approval observing as under :
“5. The information / details were called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These are the basic details required to ascertain the overall nature of the activities of the assessee and are directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard.
5.1 Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the trust / institution and to verify the compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects.
5.2 In absence of the compliance to the above requirement, it is not possible to arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects.
5.3 It is clear from the above that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to comply, but it has not complied to the same. It seems that the assessee is not having any supporting documents / evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee and the compliance to the requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. Therefore, the undersigned has left no alternative but to reject the application.
6. In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional registration granted on 26/11/2021 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.”
Being aggrieved by the rejection of the application the appellant trust preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal assailing the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(Exemption).
7. Before us, the ld. AR submitted that appellant trust is genuinely engaged into charitable activities and has stated that appellant could not comply to the notices for the reasons beyond control of the appellant which resulted in the passing of the exparte order by ld.CIT(Exemption). Reasons for the same were put forth in the affidavit filed for condonation of delay. It is therefore prayed for remanding the matter to the file of ld. CIT (Exemption) for denovo adjudication as the assessee possesses all the documents to substantiate the charitable activities performed by the appellant.
On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(Exemption).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that, in the instant case under consideration, the appellant trust filed application in the prescribed format on 31.03.2023 u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking grant of regular registration. Ld.CIT(Exemption) issued notices through ITBA portal on 24.06.2023 and 24.07.2023 calling upon the appellant to furnish certain information/clarification. However, the appellant could not comply with any of the notices. It is stated before us that the notices were sent on the email id of the previous consultant who failed to communicate the same to the appellant.
Appellant was unaware of the notices which resulted in passing of the order resulting in rejection of the application filed for grant of regular registration.
10. We therefore under the given facts and circumstances and considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the appellant. In view thereof, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Exemption) for denovo consideration of application. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(Exemption) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant in the set aside proceedings. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
11. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 06th day of January, 2026.