ZAKAT INFAQ&SADAQAH TRUST,SRINAGAR vs. CIT(EXPEMPTION), CHANDIGARH
Facts
The assessee, Zakat Infaq & Sadaqah Trust, filed an appeal against the CIT(E)'s order rejecting its application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) due to alleged deficiency in factual evidence and non-submission of documents. The appeal was filed with a delay of 190 days, which the assessee sought to condone citing its consultant's pre-occupation with his minor daughter's medical treatment. The assessee contended that it had already filed documentary evidence and was not given sufficient opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 190-day delay, acknowledging the medical emergency of the consultant's daughter. It observed that the CIT(E) did not allow sufficient time or proper opportunity for compliance. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(E) for reconsideration, directing the assessee to file all necessary documentary evidence and for CIT(E) to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) without allowing sufficient opportunity was justified; Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, 1961, Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh dated 11.06.2024 rejecting the application for registration
u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, 1961.
2 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is filed 2.
belatedly by 190 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay
along with an affidavit sworn by Mr. Nayeem Shafi, the consultant of the assessee
trust who was dealing with the tax matters of the assessee. The said Mr. Shafi has
filed an affidavit that due to medical treatment of his minor daughter (Maryam
Fatima) who was suffering from kidney problems since birth and was under
continuous medical treatment, the delay in filing of this appeal has arisen because the
consultant was pre-occupied with medical issues of his minor daughter and as such, it
is prayed that since the delay was not intentional, and there was no fault of the
assessee, the same may please be condoned and the appeal may please be admitted
for hearing on merits.
The ld. DR has no objection. Considering the reasons submitted and the
medical emergency faced by the assessee’s consultant, the delay of 190 (on hundred
ninety) days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits.
There are 8 (eight) grounds of appeal taken by the assessee and in course of
hearing before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the registration
application has been rejected on the grounds of deficiency in factual evidence and in
absence of submissions of the applicant. He further submitted that the assessee has
3 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 already filed documentary evidences of his activities including financial statement,
bank statements and proof of activities conducted in online portal.
He further submitted that the assessee is a charitable trust engaged in carrying
on charitable activity as per its objects and he disputed to the rejection of this
registration application without allowing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to
explain the case and pointed out to the last notice issued on 07.06.2024, for further
clarification.
The ld. AR stated that even though the assessee has fully replied to all earlier
notices, further clarifications were raised on 07.06.2024 and without allowing proper
opportunity to meet the said requirement, the rejection order was passed arbitrarily
on 11.06.2024 and he submitted that even the substantial documents which has been
filed earlier before the registration authority, has not been considered in its proper
perspective. As such, he prays that a fresh opportunity may please be allowed for
submission of all remaining documents as desired by the ld. CIT(E).
The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(E).
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record
and we find that sufficient time for compliance has not been allowed by the ld.
CIT(E) and as such, we remand the matter back to the files of the ld. CIT(E) to allow
one more opportunity to the assessee to file the remaining documentary evidences in
4 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 support of his contention and to reconsider the registration application afresh. The
assessee is also directed to file all documentary evidences and submissions as desired
by the ld. CIT(E) and to fully cooperate in the registration process for proper disposal
of the case.
The assessee to be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 28.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
