CONFRARIA DO SSMO SACRAMENTO E N SRA DE AMPARO DA IGREJA DE MANDUR,MANDUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU
Facts
Several assessees, primarily religious confraternities, applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected their applications and cancelled provisional registrations due to the assessees' failure to submit required documents and provide satisfactory explanations regarding the genuineness of their activities and compliance with applicable laws.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) failed to provide sufficient reasonable opportunities to the assessees to address the deficiencies and confront negative observations before rejecting their applications. Citing principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the rejection orders and remanded the cases for de novo adjudication, directing the CIT(E) to provide at least three effective opportunities to each assessee.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the rejection of applications for registration under Section 12AB due to non-compliance with documentation requirements and whether the assessees were afforded adequate opportunity to be heard.
Sections Cited
Section 12AB, Section 12A(1)(ac), Section 2(15)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, GOA
Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
DIN & Order No Sr Appeal No PAN Appellant Respondent Appealed Against
ITBA/EXM/F/EX Confraria De N Sra Do The Commissioner of ITA NO M45/2025- 1 AADTC0048H Rosario Da Capela De Income Tax, 237/PAN/2025 26/1077653258(1) Neura Exemption, Bangaluru dt. 24/06/2025
ITBA/EXM/F/EX The Commissioner of ITA NO Cofre Da capela De S M45/2025- 2 AADTC0225A Income Tax, 238/PAN/2025 Sebastiao Neura 26/1077184423(1) Exemption, Bangaluru dt. 18/06/2025
Confraria Do SSMO ITBA/EXM/F/EX The Commissioner of ITA NO Sacramento E N Sra De M45/2025- 3 AADTC0192Q Income Tax, 248/PAN/2025 Amparo Da Igreja De 26/1077647224(1) Exemption, Bangaluru Mandur dt. 24/06/2025
Confreria De N SRA Do ITBA/EXM/F/EX The Commissioner of ITA NO Bom Successo Da M45/2025- 4 AADTC0176G Income Tax, 249/PAN/2025 Capela De Dongorim 26/1077647554(1) Exemption, Bangaluru Mandur dt. 24/06/2025
Confreria Do SSMO ITBA/EXM/F/EX The Commissioner of ITA NO Sacramento E Santos M45/2025- 5 AABTC2267Q Income Tax, 347/PAN/2025 Reis Magos Da Igreja 26/1080241260(1) Exemption, Bangaluru De Reismangos, Goa dt. 01/09/2025
Appearances Assessee by : Mr Prashanth Jain [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 05/03/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06/03/2026
ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 ORDER PER BENCH (4:1); By the present bunch of five appeals the captioned different assessees impugns respective order of rejection passed u/s 12AB(3) of the Income Tax Act [in short ‘the Act’] by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Bangaluru [in short ‘CIT(E)’] thus thereby denied to grant registration and cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier.
Since facts and issues involved in these appeals are identical & common, on rival party’s common request and for the sake of brevity these appeals are heard together for being disposed off by a common and consolidated order. In adjudicating these appeals together, the ITA No 237/PAN/2025 is taken as lead case, consequently our adjudication laid in subsequent paragraphs shall mutatis-mutandis apply to remaining four appeals and be read as such.
ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 3. Without touching merits of these cases, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on limited issue of rejection of 12AB registration applications for default in complying with requirements; and subject to rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963 perused material placed on record and thoughtfully considered the rival reliance.
ITA No. 237/PAN/2025 4. We note that, the appellant vide Form No. 10AB dt. 12/11/2024 filed an application to the respondent under sub-clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act seeking thereby registration u/s 12AB of the Act. On the appellant’s effective failure to annexe required documents as contemplated u/r 17A of IT-Rules, the Ld. CIT(E) by notice dt. 23/05/2025 accorded an opportunity to make good the deficiency. In the event of failure vide show cause notice dt. 06/06/2025 one more opportunity was granted to adduce necessary documents, to prove genuineness of activities and further showcase the compliance of such requirement of ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 any other law for the time being in force. It was also informed by the registering authority that in the event of failure on the part of assessee to comply with the notice the application for registration would be rejected. In response thereto the authorised representative Mr Parmeshwar (the accountant) appeared and explained the queries with necessary supportive documents. In the event of failure on the part of assessee to provide provisional financial statements, receipt of donation, proof of payment made towards the expense and further detailed activity report (para 4), the Ld. CIT(E) was constrained to reject to grant registration and cancel the existing registration granted to appellant on 10/03/2022 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act as he could not draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities of the appellant and satisfaction over compliance of requirements of any other law for the time being in force as are material for the purpose of achieving objective of the appellant. ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 ITA No. 238/PAN/2025, 248/PAN/2025, 249/PAN/2025, & 347/PAN/2025; 5. Similarly, in these cases also effective failure of these appellants to adduce requisite documents & the absence of satisfactory explanation persuaded the Ld. CIT(A) to reject the respective applications and cancel the earlier registrations as the documents adduced and explanation tendered were insufficient to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of activities and satisfaction over compliance of requirements of any other law for the time being in force as are material for the purpose of achieving objective of these appellant assessees.
Thus, in effect the separate applications filed by the captioned appellants towards seeking registration u/s 12AB were rejected for like reasons. The appellants by these appeals seeks to remand the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with an undertaking to appear and comply with the provisions of section 17K r.w.s. 12AB to as to enable ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 the Ld. CIT(A) decide the issue of registration on merits of the case on the basis of materials and in terms of applicable provisions of law.
Before we conclude to adjudicate the request for remand it shall be immensely be important to state that, the statue empowers the registering authority to call any such documents or information so as to satisfy himself with twin prescriptions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Act viz; (1) genuineness of activities (2) Compliance with all applicable laws etc., and in order to draw conclusion over satisfaction the registering authority is duty bond to carry out wholesome & autonomous exercise according to nature/character of charitable purpose vis- a-vis the applicant engaged into.
In arriving to conclusion over satisfaction about the genuineness of activities and compliance of applicable law, the registration proceedings is expected to vouch predominantly; (a) whether applicant is a public ITAT-Panaji Page 6 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 charitable trust established in accordance with applicable Indian Law & in operation as such [Constitution/Establishment] (b) whether all the entries of object clause are in consonance with the ‘charitable purpose’ as defined by section 2(15) of the Act [Objects] (c) whether there exist any implied or express provision in the constitutional & other administrative documents/policies etc., entitling any right or power to the trust/trustee carry to engage (by itself or through agent/appointees) into any activities outside the ambit of registered objects [Rights/Power] (d) whether all the activities and operation are strictly carried out in line with the registered objects of ‘charitable in nature’ [Activity] and finally (e) whether it is compliant of all the applicable law in all respect and around the clock [Compliance]. Any proceedings culminated without vouching these former key factual (Corac) in our considered view would prima-facie be deficient as it may lead to absurd conclusion. ITAT-Panaji Page 7 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 9. In the instant case we find that, predominantly for the want of evidential documents and failure on the part of appellants to explain the fulfilment of condition for grant of registration the Ld. CIT(E) had to culminate the impugned registration proceedings without former wholesome & autonomous exercise. The rejections are primarily attributable to non-compliance on the part of these appellants. The reasons behind such non- compliance as stated that, in the course of proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) only two opportunities were provided, pursuant to show cause notice the appellant had adduced certain documents & explained them. But without further communication or without confronting the negative observation the Ld. CIT(A) culminated the proceedings by rejecting these applications. There is nothing on record to suggest otherwise. On the other hand, the Revenue could hardly assail the common submission and prayers of these appellants nor it pull to piece the factual matrix with any deprecative material. ITAT-Panaji Page 8 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 10. It is a trite law as laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case ‘Chandra Kishore Jha Vs Mahavir Prasad’ reported in 8 SCC 266 (SC), that ‘if a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner’. It shall be worthy to also underline that the opportunity of being heard should be real, reasonable and effective and same should not be empty formalities, it should not be a paper opportunity. In view of High court of Patna’s decision in ‘St. Paul’s Anglo Indian Education Society’ [2003, 262 ITR 377 (Pat)]’ in the event where assessee is deprived of reasonable opportunity and time to produce all relevant documents to substantiate its claim, any consequential order passed by the Revenue against the assessee violates the basic principle of natural justice, hence such action is unstainable in law. ITAT-Panaji Page 9 of 10
ITA Nos.237 & 238/PAN/2025, ITA Nos.248 & 249/PAN/2025 & ITA Nos.347/PAN/2025 11. In view of the former ratio, the Ld. CIT(E)’s failure
to confront negative satisfaction or his dissatisfaction
to these appellants before rejecting applications were
indeed against the provisions of statute as the action
of rejection suffered from sufficiency of reasonable
opportunity to negate the adverse observation or
dissatisfaction over compliance etc. For the reasons
these impugned orders cannot be sustained, hence
set-aside for their remand to the Ld. CIT(E) for de-
nova adjudication in accordance with law with a
direction to accord not less than three effective
opportunities in each case.
In result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 the order pronounced in the open court on date mentioned herein before.
-S/d- -S/d- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Dt: 06th March, 2026. Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)/NFAC Concerned 4. PCIT Concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Goa 6. Guard File By Order, Sr. Private Secretary / AR ITAT, Panaji. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 10
