Case Law Details
Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha Vs CIT(Exemption) (ITAT Mumbai)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has remanded the case of Mohanlal Shikshan Sanstha back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [CIT(E)] for reconsideration of its applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee had applied for these approvals through Form 10AB and had complied with multiple notices from the CIT(E). However, the final notice, issued on September 21, 2024, sought additional details with a short deadline of September 24, 2024. Due to the limited time, the assessee failed to submit the required documents, leading to rejection orders on September 25, 2024, for both applications.
During the ITAT proceedings, the assessee argued that it had made consistent efforts to comply but was unable to meet the last-minute request. The tribunal noted that the delay was primarily due to time constraints rather than non-cooperation. Given these circumstances, ITAT deemed it appropriate to provide a fresh opportunity and directed the CIT(E) to reconsider the application, ensuring due compliance from the assessee. The CIT(E) has been instructed to pass a new order within three months from the tribunal’s directive.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] rejecting application for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] dated 25.09.2024.
2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
ITA No. 5887/Mum/2024
“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(E)] erred in not granting the approval u/s. 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. The Learned CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the appellant fulfils all the conditions listed out in section 12A of the Act.
Your appellant submits that the learned CIT(E) may be directed to grant the approval u/s. 12A of the Act.”
ITA No. 5888/Mum/2024
“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(E)) erred in not granting the approval u/s. 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. The Learned CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the appellant fulfils all the conditions listed out in section 80G of the Act.
Your appellant submits that the learned CIT(E) may be directed to grant the approval u/s. 80G of the Act.”
3. Brief facts are that the assessee filed an application in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) sought certain details vide notices issued from time to time to which compliances were also made by the assessee. However, with respect to the last notice issued on 21.09.2024 seeking detailed note on activities and copy of bank statement after the receipt of provisional registration by 24.09.2024, no compliance could be made by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the assessee’s application for registration u/s 12AB vide his order dated 25.09.2024. Consequently, the application for approval u/s 80G was also rejected vide a separate order dated 25.09.2024.
Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal.
4. Before us, Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee had been making compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) from time to time. However, with regard to notice dated 21.09.2024, only three days’ time was given for making compliance. The assessee could not submit the requisite details within the short time allowed and Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to reject the application vide his order dated 25.09.2024. He, therefore, submitted that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to furnish the requisite details.
Ld. DR has also agreed to the proposition made by the Ld. AR.
5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as material placed before us. It is seen that in respect of earlier notices, the assessee had been making requisite compliance. However, due to paucity of time, it was unable to submit requisite details in response to the last notice dated 21.09.2024 and therefore Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the rejection order in view of the statutory limitation to decide the application on or before 30.09.2024. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is also directed to make requisite compliance. Ld. CIT(E) is directed to pass a fresh order within three months from the date of receipt of this order.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.12.2024.
Author Bio
