DEV SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR, RAJASTHAN vs. CIT EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to comply with opportunities given and did not file necessary documents. However, considering that necessary documents were not on file for adjudication on merits, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed two appeals against the orders of the CIT(E) rejecting their application for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected the 12AB application on grounds of incomplete form, non-registration under Rajasthan Trust Act, and genuineness of activities.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of the application for registration under section 12AB and consequential approval under section 80G by the CIT(E) was justified, and whether the assessee was granted a reasonable opportunity to present its case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’A” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 537 & 538/JP/2024
ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM These are two appeals filed by the assessee against orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] both dated 24.02.2024 passed in the matter of section 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively. The Grounds of appeal raised by the assesee are mentioned at Form 36 in respective appeals 2.1 As per the fact of the present case, the ld CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee for registration under section 12AB of the Act on the following grounds:-
1 incomplete form 10 AB 2 Registration under Rajasthan Trust Act 1959 3 Genuineness of activities and non compliance 2.2 In this regard ld. AR submitted that the application for registration of the assessee was wrongly rejected by ld CIT(E) as the assessee has already started the process for registration under the said Act. However after rejection, it was also submitted that the assessee is likely to get the said registration shortly. And as far as the other ground of rejection is concerned, ld AR submitted that no notice was served upon the assessee and thus assessee could not get reasonable opportunity therefore the order passed by ld CIT(E) are against the principle of natural justice.
2.3 On the contrary ld. DR supported the orders of ld CIT(E) and submitted that proper opportunity was granted but assessee failed to file necessary documents and details and further failed to justify the genuineness of activities.
2.4 After hearing the counsel for both the parties and after perusal of the Orders passed by ld CIT(E), we noticed that in spite of opportunities the assessee failed to comply with the same and not filed necessary documents.
2.5 Be that as it may, without going into the allegations and counter allegations of both the parties, we are of the view that since necessary documents were not on the file before ld CIT(E) for adjudicating the application on merits, Therefore, bench feels that one more opportunity be granted to the appellant. Thus the present appeal is restored to the file of ld CIT(E) to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing. The assessee would be at liberty to file any documents in support of its application for seeking registration. However the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remained cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus The Appeal of the assessee is allowed For statistical purposes.
2.6 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(E) shall in no way be construed of having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which 2.7 As regards the other appeal of the assessee relating to approval u/s 80G of the Act, it may be noted that since it is consequential to registration of the Trust u/s 12AB of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) is directed to consider approval u/s 80G in accordance with Income Tax Act, 1961 in set aside proceeding.
3.0 In the result, both the Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes with no orders as to costs.
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026