Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee society filed applications for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected these applications for lack of sufficient documentary evidence regarding charitable activities. The appeals were filed with a delay, which was condoned due to the marriage and sickness of the society's Principal Officer.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not fully comply with the second notice issued by the CIT(E) requiring documentary evidence for its charitable activities. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision after considering the assessee's submissions and evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications for registration and approval due to non-compliance with notices, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G(5), 12A(1)(ac)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These two appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against two separate orders dated 29.11.2024 and 30.12.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Lucknow [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(E)"], whereby the applications filed by the appellant in Form 10AB each seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and registration/approval under second proviso to clause (iii)(b)(B) of section 80G(5) of the Act were rejected.
At the very outset, it has been brought to the notice of the Bench that both these appeals were filed on 08.05.2025 against the impugned orders dated 29.11.2024 and 30.12.2024 by a delay of about 94 days and 66 days respectively. Assessee has submitted through the delay condonation applications that due to marriage of assessee society’s Principal Officer Mr. Anuj Khard on 02.02.2025 and his sickness thereafter, the said delay was caused in filing both these appeals. Mr. Anuj Khard has filed an affidavit in support therefore. In view of assessee’s uncontroverted submissions, supported by an affidavit, the reasons shown for the delay in filing these appeals are treated to be sufficient. The delay stands condoned.
Since, the facts and issue involved in both these appeals are similar, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The are only being narrated as under.
ITA No. 266/Agr/2025:
Brief facts state that assessee filed an application for registration of assessee trust u/s. 12AB of the Act on 29.05.2024 in Form 10AB under rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Learned CIT(E) issued notice to the assessee on 04.10.2024 for assessee’s response to be submitted on 2 | P a g e 14.10.2024, requiring the assessee to file documentary evidence to substantiate the charitable activities carried out by the assessee trust in the recent past. In response to the aforesaid notice, assessee made submissions before the ld. CIT(E), narrating the objects of the trust in detail. However, Ld. CIT(E) observed that the details/expenditure incurred on charitable activities as per objects of the trust deed were not found in the assessee’s response. Ld. CIT(E) issued another notice dated 18.11.2024, requiring the assessee to furnish documentary evidence, viz., bills, vouchers, photos, affiliation, license, fire NOC, newspaper coverage by the media etc. to substantiate the charitable activities claimed to have been carried out by the assessee trust/society in last three years, for which the expenditure has been booked in the income & expenditure account of the assessee. Assessee did not respond this notice issued by Ld. CIT(E). Ld. CIT(E), thus, passed the impugned order for want of aforesaid documentary evidence.
Assessee has preferred this appeal against the impugned order on the following grounds :
“1a). That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned Order dated 29-11-2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax, Exemption, Lucknow [for the sake of brevity, referred to as 'CIT(E)'] under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, rejecting the application of the Appellant, filed in the prescribed Form 10AB, for grant of permanent registration to it under section 12A(1)(ac) of the 3 | P a g e Income-Tax Act, 1961, is erroneous, unjustified, unwarranted and bad-in-law. 1b). That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E), Bhopal also grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in initiating the proceedings for cancellation of provisional registration/ approval to the Appellant under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act, granted on an earlier occasion.
2. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) grossly erred in rejecting the application of the Appellant for grant of permanent registration and as also, in initiating the proceedings for cancelling the provisional registration granted to it earlier without considering and appreciating the material fact that the Appellant, having been duly constituted as a Registered Charitable Institution, for pursuing the charitable objects of relief of poor, education, medical relief, yoga and advancement of any other object of general public utility, was fully eligible for grant of permanent registration under section 12A read with section 12AB of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, after having made a valid application for grant of registration by making full compliance of all the conditions as enjoined under section 12AB of the Act. …………………………….”
Perused records. Heard Ld. representative for the appellant assessee and Ld. CIT(DR) for the revenue.
Learned representative for the assessee has submitted a paper book, containing 119 pages, containing assessee’s registration certificate, bye laws, ITR computation, audit report etc. and specifically drawn the attention of the Bench towards the copies of photographs, news material and other documents in respect of the charitable activities carried out by the appellant society during the year under consideration, which are depicted from page 65 to page 75 of assessee’s paper nook, further submitting that the assessee society also incurred expenditure 4 | P a g e towards the charitable activities of the assessee society. Prayed to allow assessee’s appeal.
Learned CIT/DR has supported the impugned order.
After perusing the impugned order, we notice that the assessee does not seem to have complied with the second notice dated 18.11.2024 issued by ld. CIT(E), wherein assessee was required to furnish documentary evidence to substantiate that the charitable activities claimed to have been carried out by the assessee trust were commensurate to the expenditure booked in assessee’s income and expenditure account for relevant years. In such circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(E) for passing the order a fresh after considering assessee’s submissions and documentary evidence.
Assessee is directed to file its submissions and required documentary evidence before Ld. CIT(E) to substantiate the commencement of charitable activities with respect to the objects of the trust and expenses incurred there upon. We order accordingly. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.
In this appeal also, learned CIT(E) has declined the registration/approval of assessee’s trust u/s. 80G(5) of the Act for A.Y. 2023-24 on the similar grounds. Our findings arrived at in shall mutatis mutandis apply in this appeal also. This appeal No. 267/Agr/2025 is thus liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. and 267/Agr/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned orders dated 29.11.2024 and 30.12.2024 are set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.11.2025.