Case Law Details
Mantra Yog Gau Seva Trust Vs CIT Exemption (ITAT Mumbai)
ncome Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai addressed an appeal by Mantra Yog Gau Seva Trust against the rejection of its applications for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [CIT(E)] had rejected the applications, citing non-compliance with the document submission requirements under Rule 17A. Despite issuing multiple show cause notices, CIT(E) found that the trust failed to provide the necessary clarifications and supporting documents, leading to the rejection of its application for tax-exempt status under Section 12AB and the corresponding denial of approval under Section 80G.
Before ITAT, the trust argued that while some documents had been submitted, full compliance was hindered by unavoidable circumstances. The tribunal noted that the rejection was solely based on incomplete documentation and acknowledged the trust’s willingness to furnish the missing details. ITAT decided to set aside the CIT(E)’s order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. It directed CIT(E) to re-examine the applications based on merit, granting the trust a fair opportunity to submit the required documents. As a result, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, ensuring the trust could seek tax-exempt status after due compliance.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the orders passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai, (‘ld.CIT(E)’ for short), rejecting applications seeking registration u/s. 12A and section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short).
2. We have heard Shri Ashok Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the assessee and Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, learned Departmental Representative (‘ld. DR’ for short).
3. Briefly, the facts are, the assessee is stated to be a Charitable Trust, filed applications before the competent authority seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act as well as u/s. 80G of the Act. While verifying assessee’s application for registration u/s. 12AB of the Act, ld. CIT(E) found that in terms with Rule 17A, certain documents were required to be filed along with the application for registration. Finding some deficiencies in complying to the said provision, ld. CIT(E) called upon the assessee to remove the deficiencies. Additionally, he called for further documents/clarifications from the assessee. Alleging that the assessee did not comply with the queries raised in the subsequent show cause notices, ld. CIT(E) rejected assessee’s application seeking registration u/s. 12A of the Act. As a natural corollary, application seeking approval u/s. 80G of the Act was also rejected.
4. Before us, it is the say of the assessee that though past compliance was made, however, complete compliance could not be made because of unavoidable circumstances. Further, ld. Counsel assured that given an opportunity, assessee will comply with all the queries raised by ld. CIT(E).
5. The ld. DR submitted, in case the assessee is in a position to comply with the queries raised by the competent authority, the matter may be re-examined by him.
6. Having considered rival submissions, we find, the only reason based on which assessee’s applications seeking registration u/s. 12AB and approval u/s. 80G of the Act have been rejected is on account of non-furnishing of certain documents/clarifications sought from the assessee. However, before us, ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee has given an assurance that given an opportunity, all the queries raised by the competent authority would be complied with.
7. Considering the above, we are inclined to set aside the impugned orders of the ld. CIT(E) and restore the matters back to him for reconsideration of applications filed, seeking registration u/s. 12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Act on their own merits. Before taking decision on these applications, the assessee may be provided due and reasonable opportunity of being heard. With the afore-said observations, the matters are restored back to ld. CIT(E).
8. In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21 / 01/2025
Author Bio
