Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeal filed by assessee is against the order dated 20.03.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kashipur [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(E)’] rejecting application in Form 10AB for grant of registration under section 12AB of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that applicant-assessee filed application in Form 10AB for registration on 30.09.2023 under Rules 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. A notice was issued to the applicant on 11.01.2024 and 08.02.2024 were issued but assessee failed to file reply. Therefore, final opportunity of hearing was provided vide notice dated 01.03.2024. The assessee filed reply dated 06.03.2024. The assessee was required to submit a note on activities conducted since inception during the last three years. Assessee filed reply without any supporting documents. Ld. CIT(E) vide order dated 20.03.2024 rejected application for registration.
Being aggrieved, appellant filed present appeal.
Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/applicant submitted that Ld. CIT(E) erred to treat the applicant trust being a charitable trust whereas the applicant trust is a public religious trust. Ld. CIT(E) arbitrarily ignored the submissions and documents furnished by the applicant that the applicant is a religious trust only, in violation principles of natural justice.
Learned Departmental Representative for the Department of Revenue submitted that applicant had failed to file relevant documents.
From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that learned CIT(E) rejected application by observing non-filing of evidence/submissions on charitable activities as per objects in the trust deed by ignoring documents of religious activities in violation of principles of natural justice. Ld. CIT(E) erred in treating the applicant as a charitable trust instead of a religious trust only.
In view of above material facts, in the interest of substantial justice, impugned order dated 20.03.2024 of Learned CIT(E) is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Learned CIT(E) for fresh decision in accordance with law.