Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Shree Sami Panjrapole Sami, applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but the CIT(E) rejected the application. This rejection was due to the assessee's failure to furnish required documents and non-compliance with notices, leading the CIT(E) to question the genuineness of the trust's activities.
Held
The Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the necessary documents and re-adjudicate the application. This direction is subject to the assessee depositing a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the “Prime Minister's National Relief Fund” within 15 days, acknowledging the assessee's non-compliance.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) due to non-furnishing of documents and non-compliance with notices, and whether a reasonable opportunity of being heard was provided.
Sections Cited
Section 12A, Section 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH
Before: Shri TR Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
आदेश आदेश/ORDER आदेश आदेश PER : NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (in short ‘the CIT(E)’) dated 29.10.2025 rejecting the application for grant of approval under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had made an application for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption)
Act by filing Form No. 10AB. The Ld. CIT(E) noticed that the assessee did not furnish all the documents enlisted in Rule 17A(1) along with the application. The Ld. CIT(E) had allowed opportunities to the assessee to furnish the details vide notice dated 08.09.2025 and 08.10.2025. However, there was no compliance to the notices. Therefore, the application of the assessee was rejected as the Ld. CIT(E) was not satisfied about the genuineness of the activities of the trust & that the same were in consonance with the objects of the trust.
Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:
1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act.
2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has not provided reasonable opportuņity of being heard as provided under Second Proviso to Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act.
3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.
Shri Hasmukh V Doshi, Ld. AR appearing for the assessee explained that the non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) was due to the fault of the Counsel who did not attend the proceedings. The Ld. AR requested that the assessee is engaged in charitable A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption) activities and, therefore, another opportunity may be allowed to furnish the documents as required by setting aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E).
Per contra Shri Alpesh Parmar, Ld. CIT-DR submitted that he has no objection if the matter was set-aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.
We have considered the submissions of the assessee. We do not find any reasonable explanation for non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E). In fact, the assessee was not careful and vigilant enough while filing the application in Form No. 10AB of the Act, as the documents enlisted in Rule-17A(1) were not attached along with the application. Thereafter, no compliance was made to the notices of the Ld. CIT(E) and the details and documents as required were not furnished. We therefore, deem it proper to impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- on the assessee, which should be deposited in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund” within a period of 15 days from the receipt of this order. Subject to the payment of cost, the Ld. CIT(E) is directed to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the details and documents as required and thereafter, re-adjudicate the application of the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply before the Ld. CIT(E) and produce the document and clarification as required by him.
A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption)
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
This order is pronounced in the Open Court on 03/02/2026.