TOOBA EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE TRUST,BHIWANDI vs. CIT EXEMPTION PUNE, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the assessee's registration application back to the CIT(Exemption) for a fresh examination. This was done considering the possibility of communication gaps and insufficient time for compliance.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) for failing to respond to show cause notices. The CIT(E) had not granted sufficient time for compliance before issuing the impugned order.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(Exemption) granted adequate time for the assessee to respond to notices before rejecting the registration application under Section 12AB.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & SHRI S.S. GODARA
आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश आदेश
PER S.S. GODARA, JM :
This assesseee’s appeal arises against the ld. CIT(Exemption), Pune’s Din & Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/ 10626437771(1), dated 14.03.2024 rejecting the application of the assessee u/s.12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned CIT(E)’s impugned order herein has refused sec.12A registration to the assessee on account of the fact that the latter had failed to respond to the corresponding show cause notice(s) on various occasions.
Learned CIT-DR could not dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(E) had not even granted two weeks effective time from the date of his last hearing notice dated 14.02.2024 for compliance on or before 20.02.2024 which followed the impugned order dated 14.03.2024. And also that communication gap at various levels in such a short span of time could also not be altogether ruled-out. We accordingly deem it proper to restore the assessee’s instant sec.12A registration application back to the CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate examination as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to a rider that it shall be the assessee’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12th September, 2024.
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026