MOHANLAL SHIKSHAN SANSTHA ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI
Facts
The assessee filed an application for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected the applications because the assessee failed to provide details requested in a notice dated 21.09.2024 within the stipulated three days.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had complied with earlier notices but could not comply with the last notice due to a short time frame. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of applications for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G was justified, considering the short time given to the assessee to provide details.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G, 12A(1)(ac)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SMT. RENU JAUHRI&
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5887/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2025-26) & ITA No. 5888/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2025-26)
Mohanlal Shikshan v/s. CIT(Exemption), Mumbai Sanstha बनाम Room No. 601, Cumballa Block No. 5/6, Room No. Hill, MTNL Building, 6, Mulund Colony, Peddar Road, Mulund(West), Mumbai-400026 Mumbai-400080 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAETM7935L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी
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.
P a g e | 2 ITA No. 5887 & 5888/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2024-25 Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: ITA No. 5887/Mum/2024 “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.” ITA No. 5888/Mum/2024 “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.
P a g e | 3 ITA No. 5887 & 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
P a g e | 4 ITA No. 5887 & 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.
Sd/- Sd/- SAKTIJIT DEY RENU JAUHRI (उपाध्यक्ष/VICE PRESIDENT) (लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai दिनाुंक /Date 31.12.2024 अननकेत स ुंह राजपूत/ स्टेनो आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 3. 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अतिकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.
