PDKV RESEARCH AND INCUBATION FOUNDATION ,AKOLA vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 235/NAG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 March 2024Bench: HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that rejecting the 80G application without further opportunity, while the 12AB registration was pending and later remanded, violated principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The appellant, a section 8 company, applied for registration under section 80G(5)(vi). The CIT(E) rejected the application for failure to produce a copy of regular registration under section 12AB. The appellant sought a remand due to its pending 12AB registration.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the 80G application for non-production of 12AB registration when the latter was pending and subsequently remanded. Whether the rejection violated principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(vi),Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]
Pronounced: 21/03/2024

बनाम / V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; This appeal challenges the DIN & Order No ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2022- 23/1051695817(1) dt. 30/03/2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [in short ‘CIT(E)’] u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’].

2.

At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 57 days delay in instituting this appeal, in the larger interest of justice placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [167 ITR 5 (SC)], we deem it fit to condone the delay.

ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 3

PDKV Research & Incubation Foundation ITA No.235/PUN/2023

3.

Briefly stated facts borne out of the case records are; 3.1 The appellant is a section 8 company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 which vide its Application No. CIT Exemption Pune/2022- 23/12AA/12372 dt. 24/09/2022 in Form 10AB applied for registration u/c (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act.

3.2 The Ld. CIT(E) in-order to verify the objects, genuineness of activities and to ascertain the fulfilment of conditions for granting registration u/s 80G(5) of the Act, was put the appellant to a notice dt. 31/12/2022 thereby called upon certain additional documents. After examining the submission of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) vide para 3.1 rejected the application on appellant’s failure to produce the copy of regular registration u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) or 10(23) of the Act, as the appellant was not being falling in any of the exempted category.

3.3 Aggrieved appellant came in appeal with a prayer of remand owning to its 12AB registration pending before the registering authority.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions on the sole & substantive grievance; and subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963, perused the material placed on record. Ostensibly, the appellant company failed produce certificate of regular registration granted to it u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, as a consequence the Ld. CIT(E) without further opportunity to the appellant rejected the application in violation of principle of natural justice as directed by clause (ii)(b)(B) of 2nd proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act.

ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 3

PDKV Research & Incubation Foundation ITA No.235/PUN/2023

5.

We note that, the appellant’s application for regular registration u/s 12AB of the Act was rejected by an order dt. 30/03/2023. When the appellant challenged the said rejection in an appeal, the Co-ordinate bench vide its order in dt. 20/03/2024 remanded the matter to the registering authority for de-nova consideration. In these given circumstances, we therefore are of the considered view that, it shall be pre-mature to deal with the present appeal on merits as the appellant in all the fairness would be able to produce the copy of 12AB registration only when the matter is decided by the Ld. CIT(E) conclusively.

6.

For the aforestated reasons, without commenting on the merits, we deem it fit to set-aside the impugned rejection and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with the direction to deal therewith a fresh in accordance with law however after considering the finality of appellant’s application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Ergo ordered accordingly.

7.

In result, the appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Thursday, 21th day of March, 2024.

-S/d- -S/d- S. S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE ; ददनाांक / Dated : 21th day of March, 2024. आदेश की प्रतितलतप अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT(E), Pune 5. DR, ITAT, Nagpur Bench, 6. गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / By Order, वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीय न्यायादधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

ITAT-Nagpur Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(vi)

All 260 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →