SHRI BHAWALPUR BHAWAN TRUST SAMITI,BHAWALPUR BHAWAN vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 July 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order was passed in violation of natural justice as the assessee was not given an opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB(1)(ac)(iii). The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application for non-compliance with notices and failure to produce documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration application without providing an opportunity of being heard violates principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Hearing: 10/07/2025Pronounced: 10/07/2025

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) -Lucknow(‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 30/12/2024.

2.

The appellant filed an Application for registration u/s 12AB (1)

1.

(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The said application has been rejected vide order dated 30/12/2024on the ground that the Appellant failed to comply with the notices and failed to produce before us.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the order impugned has been passed in violation of principals of natural justice, the Ld. CIT(E) has not provided the opportunity of being heard to the Appellant, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Appellant has not complied with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) and not produced any documents in support of the claim, thus the order impugned has been rightly passed by the Ld. CIT(E), therefore, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

5.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for want of documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant and the Appellant has not been heard before passing the orders impugned. Thus, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce any/all documents in support of its claim.

6.

In the result, the appeals of the Appellant partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10th July, 2025

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →