CCNR,KALYANI, NADIA vs. ITO, WARD 41(1), NADIA, A.H. MITRA ROAD, NEDIAR PARA, KRISHNANAGAR, NADIA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal felt that the assessee deserved another chance to present their case before the CIT(E). Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust filed applications for registration under Section 12AB(1)(b) and for approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. Notices sent by the CIT(E) for response were not replied to by the assessee, leading to the rejection of their applications.
What were the issues?
Whether the applications for registration and approval were rightly rejected due to non-response to notices, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : A. Kundu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.10.2024 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These are a batch of two appeals pertaining to orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kolkata [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(E)’] as under:
:- Order u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), and – Order u/s 80G of the Act.
In both these cases the Appellant has challenged the action of Ld. CIT(E), Kolkata, in rejecting the assesse’s applications u/s 12AB(1)(b) and section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act respectively in & 240/Kol/2024.
CCNR, Kalyani, Nadia 1.1 With the help of Ld. DR the facts were gone through and it was pointed out that notices sent for eliciting response from the assessee trust were not responded to. Accordingly, the applications filed u/s 12AB(1)(b) and 80G(5)(iii) of the Act were rejected.
Aggrieved with these actions, the Appellant trust is in appeal before us, with grounds of appeal, in both cases, challenging the outright rejection of said applications.
2.1 As mentioned earlier, this matter was considered with the help of Ld. DR and it is felt that the Appellant deserves another chance to establish his bonafides before the Ld. CIT(E), Kolkata. In light of this, this matter is remanded back to the Ld. CIT(E), Kolkata for considering the case of the assessee afresh. The Appellant would do well to present the facts before the Ld. CIT(E) by promptly attending to hearing opportunities.
In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd October, 2024.
More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)
- Sat Guru Saran Niwas Trust, Agra vs CIT(Exemption), AgraITA 674/AGR/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- 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
- Samvedna Foundation Trust, Agra vs ITO, Ward Exemption, AgraITA 496/AGR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- S S Shah P M Jariwala N S Damanwala Surat V… vs CIT(Exemptions), MumbaiITA 8678/MUM/2026[2027 - 28]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- 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