Loading judgment…
Facts
MIAM Charitable Trust applied for final registration under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, after receiving provisional registration. The CIT(E) rejected these applications, stating the assessee failed to respond to notices, while the assessee contended the notices were only uploaded to the Income Tax Portal and not received via physical mail or email, thereby preventing timely compliance.
Held
The tribunal found that the assessee did not receive proper notice and thus restored the applications for registration under sections 12AA and 80G to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication (de novo). The CIT(E) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and the original rejection orders were set aside.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications for registration under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Sections Cited
12AA, 80G, 12A, 12A(1)(ac)(vi), 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANTSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
Date of Hearing – 21/11/2024 Date of Order - 27/11/2024
O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.
These two appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the denial of registration under section 12AA and section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“learned CIT(E)”].
(A.Y. 2024-25) 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 12.08.2024, rejecting the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act.
ITAs No.5260 & 5314/MUM/2024 (A.Ys. 2024-25) 2
In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: –
“The Assessee prefers an appeal against an order dated 12/08/2024 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai on following amongst other grounds, each of which is without prejudice to any other:
1. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Exemptions), has not provided proper opportunity of being heard which is against principal of natural justice.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) erred in rejecting application made for registration u/s 12A without considering facts that appellant has submitted all the required details with filed applications.”
During the hearing, the learned Authorized Representative (“learned AR”) submitted that the provisional registration was issued to the assessee on 19.01.2023 under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act and accordingly the assessee filed its application for final registration before the learned CIT(E) in Form 10AB on 14.02.2024. The learned AR submitted that the assessee filed the basic details and documents along with the aforesaid application. It was further submitted that the regular representative of the assessee attended before the office of learned CIT(E) and vide letter dated 13.08.2024 sought an adjournment till 19.08.2024. Thereafter, the representation vide letter dated 22.08.2024 filed additional details and documents on record. However, the learned CIT(E) without considering the adjournment application and submissions filed on record passed the order on 12.08.2024. From the perusal of the impugned order, we find that the learned CIT(E) issued two notices to the assessee on 02.07.2024 and thereafter on 01.08.2024 seeking details in support of the application filed by the assessee for final registration under section 12AA of the Act.
ITAs No.5260 & 5314/MUM/2024 (A.Ys. 2024-25) 3 However, in the absence of any response from the assessee, the learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee. Vide affidavit of the Managing Trustee of the assessee sworn on 18.11.2024, filed during the hearing, it is submitted that the aforesaid notices were only uploaded on the Income Tax Portal and the assessee neither received a physical copy nor received the same on its registered e-mail address. Accordingly, the relevant documents as sought by the learned CIT(E) could not be filed in time. The learned AR submitted that given another opportunity, the assessee will furnish all the documents as sought before the learned CIT(E).
Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, in view of the circumstances as noted above, we deem it appropriate to restore the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for seeking registration under section 12AA of the Act to the file of the learned CIT(E) for de novo adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the information as may be sought by the learned CIT(E) without any default. With the above directions, the impugned order is set aside and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
(A.Y. 2024-25) 7. In this appeal, the assessee has challenged the rejection of its application for the grant of a certificate under section 80G of the Act. As we have remanded the issue of grant of registration under section 12AA of the ITAs No.5260 & 5314/MUM/2024 (A.Ys. 2024-25) 4 Act to the file of the learned CIT(E) for de novo adjudication, therefore the order of the learned CIT(E) for rejecting the application for registration under section 80G of the Act is also set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for deciding afresh. As a result, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
To sum up, both appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/11/2024