ARDEE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7566/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 January 2021AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(E) that the trust deed was crucial for verifying the charitable nature and genuineness of activities. The appeal was set aside to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration after the assessee provides all necessary documents and is given a fair hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application as the assessee failed to produce the original trust deed and other required details despite multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application for non-furnishing of the trust deed and other details. Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Hearing: 04/01/2021Pronounced: 04/01/2021

O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by a Charitable Trust appellant against the order of the ld CIT(Exemption), Delhi passed u/s 12AA of the Act rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act of the assessee trust. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration of the assessee trust u/s 12AA(l)(b) read with section 12A of the Act

2. That the impugned order has been made in an arbitrary and whimsical manner and that too without giving any opportunity of being heard much less a fair opportunity and as such the order passed is against the principles of natural justice.

3. That various adverse findings recorded in the impugned order are not only contradictory, vague but also factually incorrect, legally misconceived and untenable.

4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax has failed to appreciate that, while examining the application under section 12AA of the Act, the scope was to merely examine the section 12A of the objects of the trust and, whether income received by the assessee trust is liable to be considered under section 11 and 12 of the Act Page | 1

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →