Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and for registration under section 80G. The applications were rejected by the CIT(E) due to the assessee's failure to furnish required details and documents in response to notices, leading to an ex-parte order. The assessee sought to admit additional evidence explaining the oversight and requested the matter be restored to the CIT(E).
Held
The Tribunal held that the rejection was primarily on the ground of non-furnishing of details and that the additional evidence filed by the assessee was necessary for a just adjudication. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for de-novo consideration after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration applications for non-compliance without affording reasonable opportunity, and the admission of additional evidence, warrants remanding the matter for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(ii), 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
O R D E R
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), (in short “Ld. CIT(E)”), Ahmedabad vide orders dated 30.10.2025.
We shall first discuss the assessee’s appeal against rejection of the assessee’s application for grant of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act in ITA Number 2660/Ahd/2025.
The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. The Ld. CIT(E) has erred, both in law and on facts of the case, in passing annex-parte order rejecting the application for registration of the trust moved under sub-clause (ii) of the clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(E) has erred, both in law and on facts, in passing the order without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard.
&2661/Ahd/2025 Shardaben Education Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –NA - 2– 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.”
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a charitable trust, filed an application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) in Form No. 10AB. The application was processed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) in terms of section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act read with Rule 17A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. During the course of proceedings, the CIT(Exemptions) issued notices calling upon the assessee to furnish details and documents as prescribed under Rule 17A(2), in order to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the activities of the trust, their conformity with the stated objects and compliance with other laws material for achieving those objects. According to the CIT(Exemptions), although the notices were duly served, the assessee neither filed any submissions or documents nor sought adjournment. In the absence of the required details, the CIT(Exemptions) recorded that he was unable to satisfy himself regarding the genuineness of the activities of the trust and their alignment with the charitable objects. On this reasoning, the application for renewal of registration filed in Form No. 10AB was rejected by Ld. CIT (Exemption).
The assessee is in appeal before us against the order passed by CIT(Exemptions) rejecting the application of the assessee.
Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee challenged the impugned order on the ground that it was passed ex-parte and in violation of the principles of natural justice. It was submitted that the CIT(Exemptions) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application without affording a Shardaben Education Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –NA - 3– reasonable opportunity of being heard. It was contended that the assessee trust has charitable objects and carries on genuine activities, and the rejection of registration was not based on any adverse finding on merits but solely on account of non-response to notices by the assessee trust.
The learned Counsel further filed an application for admission of additional evidence before us. In the said application, it was submitted that the assessee had inadvertently failed to respond to the notices issued by the CIT(Exemptions) due to oversight, which resulted in the passing of the ex- parte order. It was submitted that the assessee has all the necessary details and documentary evidences which were called for by the CIT(Exemptions), and a complete draft reply along with supporting annexures has now been prepared. The additional evidence sought to be placed on record includes copies of Form Nos. 10AC and 10AB, notices issued by the CIT(Exemptions), draft replies to such notices and relevant annexures. According to the learned Counsel for the assessee, these documents go to the root of the matter, are vital for adjudication of the controversy and deserve to be admitted in the interest of justice. It was therefore prayed that the additional evidence be admitted and the matter be restored to the file of the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration.
We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record, including the application for admission of additional evidence.
It is evident that the application for renewal of registration has been rejected by the CIT(Exemptions) primarily on the ground of non-furnishing &2661/Ahd/2025 Shardaben Education Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –NA - 4– of details. In the present case, the assessee has filed an application for additional evidence explaining the circumstances under which the notices issued by the CIT(Exemptions) could not be responded to and has produced material which is directly relevant for deciding the issue of renewal of registration. In our considered view, these evidences are necessary for a just and proper adjudication of the matter and deserve to be considered by the Ld. CIT (Exemption).
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(Exemptions) for de-novo consideration of the assessee’s application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(Exemptions) shall consider the additional evidence and other material placed on record, afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Needless to say, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim for registration and all issues are left open for fresh adjudication.
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Now we shall come to the assessee’s appeal in the assessee has challenged the order rejecting the assessee’s application for grant of registration u/s 80G of the Act. The facts and issues are similar to in so far the application filed by the assessee was rejected primarily on account of non- compliance on part of the assessee.
&2661/Ahd/2025 Shardaben Education Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –NA - 5–
Accordingly, the matter is hereby restored to the file of CIT(Exemptions) for de-novo consideration after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the combined result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. This Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 19/02/2026
Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 19/02/2026 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,