MOHANLAL SHIKSHAN SANSTHA ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5887/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 December 2024AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that while the assessee had complied with earlier notices, the failure to respond to the last notice within the short timeframe led to the rejection by the CIT(E). The Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to provide the necessary compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed applications for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G. The CIT(E) sought details, and while the assessee complied with earlier notices, they could not provide the requested information for the last notice dated 21.09.2024 within the three-day timeframe given.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of application for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G by the CIT(E) was justified given the circumstances of short notice for compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SMT. RENU JAUHRI&

For Appellant: Shri Narayan Atal
For Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subhash
Hearing: 30.12.2024Pronounced: 31.12.2024

Assessee by : Shri Narayan Atal Revenue by : Dr. K. R. Subhash Date of Hearing 30.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 31.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] rejecting application for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] dated 25.09.2024.

& 5888/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2024-25 Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(E)] erred in not granting the approval u/s. 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Learned CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the appellant fulfils all the conditions listed out in section 12A of the Act. Your appellant submits that the learned CIT(E) may be directed to grant the approval u/s. 12A of the Act.

“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(E)) erred in not granting the approval u/s. 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The Learned CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the appellant fulfils all the conditions listed out in section 80G of the Act. Your appellant submits that the learned CIT(E) may be directed to grant the approval u/s. 80G of the Act.”

3.

Brief facts are that the assessee filed an application in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) sought certain details vide notices issued from time to time to which compliances were also made by the assessee. However, with respect to the last notice issued on 21.09.2024 seeking detailed note on activities and copy of bank statement after the receipt of provisional registration by 24.09.2024, no compliance could be made by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the assessee’s application for registration u/s 12AB vide his order dated 25.09.2024. Consequently, the application for approval u/s 80G was also rejected vide a separate order dated 25.09.2024.

& 5888/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2024-25 Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal.

4.

Before us, Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee had been making compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) from time to time. However, with regard to notice dated 21.09.2024, only three days’ time was given for making compliance. The assessee could not submit the requisite details within the short time allowed and Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the application vide his order dated 25.09.2024. He, therefore, submitted that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to furnish the requisite details. Ld. DR has also agreed to the proposition made by the Ld. AR.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions as well as material placed before us. It is seen that in respect of earlier notices, the assessee had been making requisite compliance. However, due to paucity of time, it was unable to submit requisite details in response to the last notice dated 21.09.2024 and therefore Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the rejection order in view of the statutory limitation to decide the application on or before 30.09.2024. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is also directed to make requisite & 5888/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2024-25 Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha compliance. Ld. CIT(E) is directed to pass a fresh order within three months from the date of receipt of this order.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31.12.2024.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →