Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an online application in Form 10AB for registration under Section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application, stating that no details were provided in response to notices. The assessee argued that they had submitted all necessary details, which were not considered by the CIT(E).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) passed an order without referring to the documents submitted by the assessee. Upon reviewing the uploaded details, it was found that relevant evidence was available. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the Form 10AB application by the CIT(E) was justified, considering the submission of details by the assessee.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB, Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi&
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short].
We note that the assessee filed online application on 10.01.2024 in Form 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act. The ld. CIT(E), while processing the application, asked the assessee to show-cause as to why its application should not be rejected on account of reasons mentioned in para 3 of the impugned order. For having no such details, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee.
The ld. AR Shri Dharshan Bothra, C.A. drew our attention to the paper book at pages 19 & 20 and submits that the assessee has submitted everything in detail, but, however, not considered by the ld. CIT(E). Further, he drew our attention to page 18 of the paper book and submits that details as sought by the ld. CIT(E) were uploaded on 03.07.2024 in response to the notice dated 24.05.2024. He argued that details are furnished by the assessee and the ld. CIT(E) could not consider the same while processing Form 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. He prayed to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
The ld. DR Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT drew our attention to para 4 of the impugned order and argued that the ld. CIT(E) clearly held that no details were submitted by the assessee in response to the notices issued and argued that the ld. CIT(E) rightly rejected the application of the assessee as there was no details furnished by the assessee.
Having considered the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and material evidence as filed by the assessee in the form of paper book, we note that the ld. CIT(E) passed order on 18.07.2024, but, however, there was no reference to documents as furnished by the assessee. On perusal of the details as uploaded and indicated in the acknowledgement at pages 18 to 20, we are of the considered opinion that the relevant evidences in support of Form 10AB seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act are available with the ld. CIT(E). Since the ld. CIT(E) has not considered the relevant evidences, we deem it proper to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences in support of its claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 27th November, 2024 at Chennai.