SHRI GULABRAO ESHWARA KHANDVE EDUCATION FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 860/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 August 2024Bench: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA (Vice President), SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the CIT(Exemption) had not discussed the assessee's object clauses and noted potential communication gaps. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(Exemption)'s order declining registration under section 12AB. The CIT(Exemption) had cited failure to file relevant details and prove genuineness of activities. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) properly adjudicated the application for registration under section 12AB without discussing the assessee's object clauses and considering all aspects.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 29.08.2024Pronounced: 30.08.2024
1.

This assessee’s appeal, arise against the CIT (Exemption), Pune, Pune’s Din and Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1062421136(1), dated 11.03.2024, involving proceedings u/s.12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Learned CIT-DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing that the CIT(E) herein has rightly declined the assessee’s sec.12A registration on account of the latter’s

2 ITA.No.860/PUN./2024 failure in filing all the relevant details in the corresponding proceedings. Mr. Ajay further takes us to the CIT(E) detailed discussion in para-4 that the assessee had not even proved genuineness of it’s activities during registration proceedings.

3.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s foregoing contentions. We find from a perusal of the CIT(E)’s impugned order that he has not even discussed the assessee’s object clauses in the trust deed as to under which limb the case is covered i.e., whether for the specified charitable objects or under the last head of general public utility. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the CIT(E) had granted last opportunity on 01.03.2024 followed by his impugned order dated 11.03.2024 and therefore, possibility of some communication gaps at assessee’s behest also could not be altogether ruled-out. Be that as it may, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the assessee’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

3 ITA.No.860/PUN./2024

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30.08.2023.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →