UNNATI FOUNDATION MORENA UNNATI SAMAJ KALYAN EVAM,MORENA vs. CIT[EXEMPTION], BHOPAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
Considering the principles of natural justice and potential communication issues in the faceless regime, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee another opportunity to present its case. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application for registration under sections 12AB and 80G(5) was rejected by the CIT(E) vide an order dated 15.03.2024. The assessee filed an appeal against this rejection. During the hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of the application for registration was justified given the failure of the assessee to appear and furnish details, and whether principles of natural justice warrant another opportunity for hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aggrieved by rejection of an application filed in Form No.10AB for seeking registration u/s 12AB and 80G(5) vide impugned order dated 15.03.2024, the assessee is in further appeal before us. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee despite notice.
Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the application has been rejected in view of the fact that the assessee failed to furnish the required details as called for by approving authority in hearing notices. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps at various levels during faceless regime, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT (Exemption). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter of registration stand restored back to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its applications. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19th February, 2025.
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 →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026