SARVODYA SHISHU SHIKSHA SAMITI,GHAZIABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the order passed without proper service of notice to the assessee is bad in law. The matter was remanded to the CIT(E) for fresh disposal after issuing notice to the correct address.
What were the facts?
The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application without proper notice being served to the assessee at their correct address.
What were the issues?
Whether the order passed by the CIT(E) for rejection of registration under Section 12AA is valid when proper notice was not served to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI FRIDAY BENCH ‘G ’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY
Aggrieved by the Order dated 24/9/2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow (Ld. CIT(E)) u/s. 12AA( 1 )(b)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the case of Sarvodya Shihu Siksha Samiti (the ‘Assessee’), this Appeal is preferred by the Assessee.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee claims to have been running a school for education to all as a dream project of government for education to all and filed an application for registration under section 12 AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short uthe Act”) on 31/3/2018 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (exemptions), Lucknow (“CIT (E)”). Ld. CIT(A) by order dated 24/9/2018 rejected the prayer of the assessee.
Grievance of the assessee before us is that in spite of the fact that the assessee had given their address as Rally International School, Nitikhand-III, Indirapuram, UP-201014, no notice was served on the assessee in this address and on the other hand the impugned order shows the orders of the assessee has Sarvodaya Shishu Siksha Samiti, 004. Kautilya Appartment, Vasundhara, Gaziabad. Ld. AR, therefore, submits that the order passed without giving an opportunity to the assessee is bad under law and cannot be sustained.
Ld. DR submits that vide paragraph No. 2 of the impugned order, it was noted that the notice dated 31/8/2018 percent to the assessee on the address furnished by them in form No. 10 A, and therefore, the impugned order does not suffer any irregularity or illegality.
We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. It is evident that in form 10 A enclosed at page numbers 25 to 27 in the appeal set, the orders of the assessee was noted by the authorities in the impugned order is something different from the address given in the form 10 A. There is no material before us to show that the notice was issued to the address given in form 10 A. The impugned order clearly shows that the address of the assessee is noted wrongly from the one given in form 10 A. If really the notice was issued to the address given in form 10 A, the mistake of address would not have taken place in the impugned order.
In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that there is no proper service of notice to the assessee in the address given in form 10 A, and therefore, the impugned order needs to be set-aside and remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh disposal after issuing notice to the correct address of the assessee as given in form 10 A. We order accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Above decision was pronounced on 7lh the day of August, 2020.
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026