THE PATH OF JOY FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1745/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 July 2024AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial 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 observed that the impugned order did not mention the electronic evidence submitted by the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(Exemptions) to pass a speaking order after considering the electronic evidence and ensuring compliance with natural justice principles.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a trust, was granted provisional registration under section 12AB of the IT Act. They applied for regular registration, but the CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application stating that the assessee did not provide proof of commencement of activities. The assessee contended that they had submitted all required information, including videos, electronically.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of regular registration under section 12AB was justified without considering the electronically submitted evidence of activities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH

Before: SHRI BR BASKARAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri. Bharat Kumar
For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh
Hearing: 25/06/2024Pronounced: 11/07/2024

आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M):

1.

1. 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15.02.2024 passed by learned CIT(Exemptions), Cumballa Hill, Mumbai, wherein learned CIT(Exemptions) has rejected the application of the appellant/provisional trust for seeking regular registration u/s. 12AB of the IT Act.

2. Perused the material on records and heard learned representatives for both the parties.

The Path of Joy Foundation 3. Perusal of the record shows that the appellant was granted provisional registration u/s. 12AB of the Act by CPC. Appellant filed an application in the prescribed form 10AB for seeking regular registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. Learned CIT(Exemptions) rejected appellant’s application on the ground that the assessee did not provide the proof of commencement of activities.

4.

Learned representative for the appellant assessee has drawn the attention of the bench at page 14–15 of assessee’s paper book and indicated that all required informations including videos in respect of the activities of the trust were submitted through electronic medium to the department. Learned CIT(Exemptions) has not considered the same before passing impugned order.

5.

We find that there is no mention of such electronic evidence in the impugned order. In such circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just to restore the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Exemptions) for passing speaking order on merit afresh after taking into consideration, the aforesaid electronic evidence. Needless to say that learned CIT(Exemptions) shall ensure substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.02.2024 is set aside. The appeal is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(Exemptions) for disposal in accordance with law. Order pronounced on 11.07.2024.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →