BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH GLIDING AND FLYING CLUB,BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH, NIWAI, TONK-304022 vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, KAILASH HEIGHT, LAL KOTHI, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR-302015

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order of the Ld.CIT (Exemption), Jaipur dated 19-03-2023 passed under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein the solitary ground of the assessee is as under:- ‘’That on the facts and in law the ld. CIT(E) grossly erred in holding that in the absence of registration of assessee under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, the assessee is not eligible for registration u/s 12AB. The assessee is registered under the Rajasthan Societies 2 BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH GLIDING AND FLYING CLUB VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR Registration Act, 1962. On the basis of facts, and circumstances of the case and in law the registration u/s 12AB of the Act out to be allowed since the applicant is an charitable institution.’’ 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee vide his application dated 07-08-2023 prayed for adjournment in the case on the ground that some details are required to be collected from the assessee and based on which paper books and written submission shall be submitted before the Bench. Thus, in the absence of these papers, the assessee will not be able to argue the case before the Bench. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld DR objected to the adjournment application of the assessee. 2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted from the adjournment application of the assessee indicating therein that some part of details of the assessee is received and some part of details of the assessee is also awaited to complete the paper book and written submission which appears to be a flimsy plea and not appropriate to consider the adjournment application which is rejected.

3 BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH GLIDING AND FLYING CLUB VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR 3.1 Apropos solitary ground of the assessee, it is noted that the ld. CIT(E) rejected the claim of registration u/s 12AB of the Act to the assesse trust by observing as under:- ‘’2.5 Assessee vide letter dated 22-02-2023 was asked to submit documents/ explanation, the relevant portion of which is reproduced as under:- ‘’10. Whether the institution is registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, if not, please given explanation that why same should not be considered violation of law and accordingly why your application should not be rejected.’’ Further, another opportunity was also provided vide letter dated 12-03-2023, the relevant portion of which is reproduced as under:- ‘’On perusal of the documents furnished by you, it is seen that the institution is not registered under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959….. Furnish an explanation as to why the same should not be considered as violation of Section 12AB(1)(b)(i)(B) of the Income Tax Act read with Section 17 of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of New Noble Education Society Civil Appeal N. 3794 of 2014 dated 19-10-2022 and why the application filed by you should not be rejected.’’ However, assessee has failed to prove that assessee is registered under RPT Act, 1959 as discussed above. In the light of above discussion and in the absence of registration under Rajasthan Public Trust, 1959, assessee is not eligible for registration u/s 12AB.

4 BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH GLIDING AND FLYING CLUB VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR 03. In view of above discussion at length, applicant’s claim of registration under section 12AB is being rejected on following grounds:-

 Non-registration with RPT Act, 1959.’’ 3.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee mainly submitted that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to submit the case and also advance the documents before the ld. CIT(E) concerning the registration of the Trust. 3.4. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(E). 3.5 We have heard the rival contentions and perused material available on record. The Bench noted that ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee u/s 12AB of the Act as mentioned in his order (supra). It is pertinent to mention that during the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to submit the case and also advance the documents before the ld. CIT(E) concerning the registration of the Trust. The Bench does not want to go into merit of the case but it is imperative that the assessee must be provided one more opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E). In this view of the matter, the Bench feels that the assessee should be given one more chance to contest the case before the ld. CIT(E) and the ld. AR of the assessee is 5. ITA NO. 277/JP/2023 BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH GLIDING AND FLYING CLUB VS CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR directed to produce all the relevant papers concerning the issue in question before the ld. CIT(E) to settle the dispute raised hereinabove. 3.6 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.