Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, a trust, was granted provisional registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. They applied for regular registration but the CIT(Exemptions) rejected their application for not proving the commencement of activities. The appellant claimed to have submitted evidence, including videos, which were not considered.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the impugned order did not mention the electronic evidence submitted by the appellant. To ensure justice and fair play, the matter was restored to the CIT(Exemptions) to pass a speaking order after considering the evidence and ensuring principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Exemptions) erred in rejecting the regular registration application without considering the evidence of activities submitted by the appellant.
Sections Cited
12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH
Before: SHRI BR BASKARAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M):
1. 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 27.06.2023 passed by learned CIT(Exemptions), Cumballa Hill, Mumbai, wherein learned CIT(Exemptions) has rejected the application of the appellant/provisional trust, 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 for want of necessary compliance with regard to the proof of commencement of activities of the said trust.
Learned representative for the appellant has submitted that the applicant has been performing various activities and the videos of such activities were also submitted before learned CIT(Exemptions) through electronic medium, however, learned CIT(Exemptions) has not considered the same.
We find that impugned order does not make any mention of aforesaid electronic evidence in the impugned order. In such circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and proper to restore the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Exemptions) for passing speaking order after taking note of aforestated electronic evidence to ascertain the genuineness of the said activities. Needless to say that learned CIT(Exemptions) shall ensure substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice.
In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 27.06.2023 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.