MONDAL BAGAN MILANI SANGHA,HOOGHLY vs. THE ITO, WARD 24(1), HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL, HOOGHLY
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay, admitted the appeal, and restored the issue to the CIT(E). The CIT(E) was directed to admit the application for registration and decide it after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) was rejected by the CIT(E) in limine due to non-appearance. The assessee attributed this to a tax consultant's failure to communicate hearing notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the registration application without affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & DR. MANISH BORAD
आदेश/O R D E R PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2024-25 is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ld. CIT(E)’) dated 23rd November, 2023.
Assessee filed the application for condonation of delay and perusal of the same indicates that the tax consultant who was
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the application on Form no.10AB of the Act filed for the registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) has been rejected in limine by CIT (E). He therefore, prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT (E) offering one more opportunity to the assessee.
On the other hand, the ld. DR was fair enough in not opposing the request made by the ld. counsel for the assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions and placed the records placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a charitable organization working with the object of relief to poor, medical relief and charitable activity in the field of education. The assessee enjoys his provisional registration granted vide provisional approval order dated 9th July, 2021 for the period of A.Y. 2021-22 to A.Y. 2023-24. We also observe that the assessee filed an application on form 10B for registration u/s 12AB(i)(b)(ii) of the Act. However, ld. CIT (E) dismissed the application for registration u/s 12A(i)(AC)(3) of the Act in limine for non-appearance / non-
We observe that the assessee which is a charitable organization has filed the income tax returns and also getting the books of accounts audited. Audit reports dated 31.03.2021, 31.03.2022, 31.03.2023, has been furnished on the income tax portal. Considering the genuine hardship faced by the assessee on account of mis-communication/ no-communication from the tax consultant, looking after the taxation matters, we in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, restore the issue back to the file of ld. CIT(E), directing him to admit the assessee’s application on Form 10AB for registration u/s 12A(i)(ac)(3) of the Act and after offering reasonable opportunity to the assessee to file relevant detail, shall decide the issue in accordance with law and grant the registration if the assessee is otherwise found to be eligible. Also assessee is directed to remain compliant. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 4th October, 2024 at Kolkata.
More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3149/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sevasetu Foundation, Vadodara vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)…ITA 3148/AHD/2026[NA]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- D vs Welfare Foundation, Thanevs.Income Tax…ITA 6191/MUM/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026