JANEEV CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,KOLHAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, PUNE , PUNE

Aggrieved by the aforestated rejections and cancellation of provisional registrations granted to it, the appellant assessee has set-up these twin appeals against respective impugned orders alleging the action of Ld. CIT(E) as violative of principle of audi alteram partem.

We have heard both rival parties; and subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT Rules, perused material placed on record which suggests that, the preliminary submission of the appellant did fail to give plausible response to various queries raised by the registering authority and also failed to substantiate its activities with cogent evidences so as enable him to draw a reasonable conclusion about the genuineness of the activities of the appellant. As a consequence, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected these applications after observing principle of natural justice as commanded by sub-clause (B) of section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) and by clause (ii)(b)(B) of 2nd proviso to 80G(5) of the Act r.w. proviso to rule 11AA(5) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. This in our considered view remained flawless.

It is to be appreciated that, the purpose of registration of trust/fund u/s 12A/12AB and granting 80G recognition derives their spirit from Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in our Constitution. The Govt. of India makes every endeavour to provide welfare to one and all, in view thereof the registration for public charitable funds/trusts are given in order to ensure that through these funds/trust benefits flows to entire society, thereby objective of Directive Principles of State Policy is achieved. These provisions of welfare legislation meant to enhance socio economic welfare of the society. Therefore, considering the compelling & ousting circumstance owning to which the appellant did fail to clarify the defects/discrepancies & explain, we in larger interest of justice are of considered view that, the appellant deserves one more opportunity to make good the defects/shortcomings.

In view thereof, without offering our comment on merits of the case, we set aside both the impugned orders and remit the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) for de-nova consideration, preferably in three effective hearings to the appellant assessee in each case separately.

In result, both these appeals of the appellant are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Tuesday, 27th day of February, 2024.