M/S SUSHILA DEVI CENTRE FOR PROFESSIONAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH,DEHRADUN vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), KANPUR (JAO- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN), DEHRADUN

ITA 131/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 October 2025AY 2024-2523 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT lacked the necessary jurisdiction to cancel the registration. The order of cancellation was found to be illegal and bad in law due to procedural and jurisdictional defects.

What were the facts?

The assessee's registration under Section 12A/12AB was cancelled retrospectively by the PCIT. This cancellation was based on alleged non-genuine activities and diversion of funds, stemming from a search and seizure operation.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were whether the PCIT had the jurisdiction to cancel the registration and whether the cancellation order was passed following due process and legal provisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(4),Section 127,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH: DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv, Shri Shivam Yadav, Adv, Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Amar Pal Singh, JCIT-DR
Hearing: 11.09.2025Pronounced: 17.10.2025

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ('the Ld. PCIT' in short), passed u/s 12AB(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein the Ld. PCIT cancelled the registration granted to the assessee u/s 12A/12AB of the act with retrospective effect from Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2023-24 and 2024-25 and all the subsequent previous years in terms of the sub-clause 2 of section 12AB of the Act and treated the assessee as AOP for the purposes of charging tax.

2.

Brief

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 12AB(4)

All 195 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →