Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Jeevan Jyoti Vidhya Vikas Samiti, applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) but allegedly failed to respond to clarification notices issued by the CIT(E), claiming non-service. Consequently, the CIT(E) rejected the application for registration due to the lack of proof regarding the charitable nature and genuineness of activities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the rejection was due to non-compliance, not an adverse inference on merits. Considering the assessee's small-town location and claims of non-service of notices and the CIT(E)'s order, the Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and remanded the case back to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Rejection of application for registration under Section 12A due to alleged non-compliance with notices; dispute over service of notices.
Sections Cited
12AB(1)(ii)(B), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12A, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW ‘A’ BENCH, LUCKNOW
O R D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(Exemption) under section 12AB(1)(ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein the ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application of the assessee for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii). The grounds of appeal
are as under:- “1-
1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. That appellant could not make compliance of the three notices as mentioned in Form-10AD, because the same was not served upon them. Accordingly, rejection of application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in Form-10AB vide Form-10AD is illegal, against the law of natural justice and without jurisdiction.
2. That the appellant reserves right to modify and/ OR add any other ground OR grounds of appeal as the circumstances of the case might require OR justify.”
2. The facts of the case are that the assessee society filed an application on 5.04.2022 for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act in Form No. 10AB. Accordingly, vide letter dated 27.08.2022, certain clarifications were sought from the assessee but no reply was filed. A reminder notice was sent on 3.10.2022 fixing the date of compliance on 10.10.2022 but the ld. CIT(E)
Jeevan Jyoti Vidhya Vikas Samiti A.Ys. 2021-22 to 2023-24 records that no reply has been filed. A final opportunity was provided vide notice dated 11.10.2022 fixing date of compliance on 17.10.2022 but this too was not responded to. The ld. CIT(E) recorded that in the absence of any reply, the charitable nature of the objects and the genuineness of the charitable activities of the assessee trust could not be proved hence she rejected the application for registration as, “non-maintainable”. However, she did not cancel the provisional approval earlier granted by the CPC under section 12A / 80G (if any).
The assessee is aggrieved at this order of the ld. CIT(E) and has accordingly come in appeal before us. On the appointed date of hearing, nobody was present on behalf of the assessee. Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR assisted the Bench. He drew our attention to the grounds of appeal
filed by the assessee in which the assessee had submitted that it could not make compliances to the notices since it had not been served with the said notices. However, the ld. CIT DR submitted that all notices were issued electronically and therefore, the ground was fit to be dismissed as the notices would have been sent on the Portal and on the email address provided by the assessee at the time of filing of application.
4. We have duly considered the facts and circumstances of the case. The application has only been rejected for want of furnishing of necessary details before the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) has not drawn any adverse inference against the assessee. However, she has not extended the benefits for permanent registration in view of the failure of the assessee to comply. Considering that the assessee does not stand to benefit for not making compliance, and noting that the assessee is located in small town i.e. Jalaun and claims that even its appeal was delayed because it had not been served with the order of the ld. CIT(E) before 1.07.2025, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to condone the delay in the filing of the appeal and restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for a decision on merits after giving the assessee due opportunity of being heard. We also advise the assessee to remain vigilant and make due compliance of notices issued by the