SARDAR AANTAJI MANKESHWAR GANDHE SMRUTI NYAS,PUNE vs. CIT (E), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1459/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 November 2024Bench: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA (Vice President), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(E), directing that the assessee be given one more opportunity to submit the required details and substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application after the assessee failed to provide explanations for discrepancies pointed out in notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) properly rejected the registration application without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee to rectify discrepancies.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AA,Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE

Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

Hearing: 27.11.2024Pronounced: 29.11.2024

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.05.2024 of the learned CIT(E), Pune, rejecting the application for registration u/sec.12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act").

2.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application u/sec.12A in Form-10AB on 27.12.2023. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the Trust/Institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued

2 ITA.No.1459/PUN./2024 through ITBA portal on 12.03.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information . The assessee in response to the same filed certain details. However, the learned CIT(E) on verification of the details noticed certain discrepancies and therefore, issued another notice to the assessee on 01.05.2024. Since the assessee did not furnish any explanation to the discrepancies intimated to it, the learned CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. He, therefore, rejected the application filed by the assessee and also cancelled the provisional registration granted on 27.05.2021 u/sec.12AB of the Act read with sec.12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act.

3.

Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

3.1. Learned Counsel for the Assessee at the outset submitted that adequate opportunity has not been granted by the learned CIT(E). He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate it’s case by filing requisite details before the CIT(E).

4.

The Learned DR on the other hand, strongly opposed the arguments advanced by the Learned counsel for the assessee and submitted that despite opportunities granted by the CIT(E), the assessee did not furnish any details.

3 ITA.No.1459/PUN./2024 Therefore, the order of the learned CIT(E) be upheld and the grounds raised by the assessee should be dismissed.

5.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find on the basis of the submissions made by the assessee in compliance to notice dated 12.03.2024, the learned CIT(E) found certain discrepancies and therefore, he issued another notice to the assessee on 01.05.2024 pointing-out the discrepancies. We find the assessee did not furnish any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it for which the learned CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. He therefore, rejected the application for grant of registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier. It is the submission of the Learned counsel for the assessee that only one opportunity was given by the CIT(E) and given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate it’s case by filing requisite details as called for by the CIT(E). Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the issue to the file of CIT(E) with a direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate it’s case by filing all the requisite details and decide the issue as

per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the required details before the CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment, failing which, the

1.

4 ITA.No.1459/PUN./2024 CIT(E) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 29.11.2024.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →