NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND CRIME CONTROL BUREAU,RANCHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, RANCHI , RANCHI

PDF

ITA 47/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 November 2025AY 2025-26Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee stated that necessary documents and explanations could not be furnished due to unavoidable circumstances.4. When the appeals were called for hearing, although notices had been duly served, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since the matters were pending for a considerable time, the Bench proceeded to hear the DR and perused the records. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee is a habitual non-compliant entity, having failed to respond before the CIT (Exempt4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee, National Human Right and Crime-Control Bureau, filed applications for registration under section 12A/12AB and approval under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT (Exemption) rejected both applications ex parte, as the assessee failed to appear or provide requested documents despite multiple notices. The assessee contended that unavoidable circumstances prevented them from furnishing the documents.

Held

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E)'s ex parte orders were not on merits and affected the assessee's substantive rights. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remanded the matters back to the CIT (Exemption), directing them to grant the assessee a final opportunity to submit all necessary documents and evidence. The assessee is required to comply strictly, failing which the CIT(E) may pass orders based on the available records.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT (Exemption) was justified in passing ex parte orders rejecting the assessee's applications for registration and approval due to non-compliance, and whether the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to present its case.

Sections Cited

12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB(1)(b), 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “RANCHI” BENCH, RANCHI

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : None Department represented by : Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, CIT DR Date of concluding the hearing : 13.11.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 20.11.2025 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two appeals, are filed by the assessee against the common orders dated 12.12.2024 passed by the CIT (Exemption), Patna. In the CIT (Exemption) rejected the assessee’s application filed in Form 10AB seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) read with section 12AB(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act. In the CIT (Exemption) rejected the assessee’s

Facts in brief are that the assessee had filed both applications seeking grant of registration/approval. The CIT (Exemption) issued multiple notices calling for necessary details and supporting documents. However, the assessee did not appear, nor did it file the required information. As a result, the CIT (Exemption) recorded that the assessee failed to comply with statutory requirements and therefore proceeded to pass ex parte orders, rejecting both applications.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred these appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee stated that necessary documents and explanations could not be furnished due to unavoidable circumstances.

When the appeals were called for hearing, although notices had been duly served, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since the matters were pending for a considerable time, the Bench proceeded to hear the DR and perused the records. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee is a habitual non-compliant entity, having failed to respond before the CIT (Exemption) as well as before the Tribunal. However, he stated that if the Tribunal considers it appropriate, a final opportunity may be granted in the interest of justice.

From the record, it is evident that the Ld. CIT (Exemption) passed both orders ex parte, solely because the assessee did not appear or file the documents required for consideration of its applications. Grant of registration under section 12A/12AB and approval under section 80G(5) requires verification of the objects, activities, and financials of the institution. Such verification could not be completed due to non-cooperation by the assessee. While the assessee has been non-cooperative, the orders passed are ex parte and therefore not on merits. Grant or denial of registration/approval affects & 48/RAN/2025 National Human Rights and Crime Control Bureau the substantive rights of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, one more opportunity should be granted, subject to strict compliance. We accordingly hold that the issues require fresh adjudication by the Ld. CIT (Exemption) after giving the assessee a final opportunity.