Mulnivasi Publication Trust Vs CIT (ITAT Pune)
The Pune Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal heard an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.01.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune rejecting the assessee’s application filed in Form No.10AB under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The assessee challenged the rejection of its registration application and cancellation of provisional registration on the ground that the Commissioner (Exemption) denied relief solely because information sought during proceedings was not furnished within time, despite the assessee requesting a short adjournment. The assessee contended that considering the genuineness of the trust and its educational activities, one more opportunity should have been granted for furnishing the required details.
The facts showed that the assessee had earlier been granted provisional registration under Section 12AB read with Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) on 07.04.2023 for Assessment Years 2023-24 to 2025-26. The assessee had also filed returns of income for Assessment Years 2022-23 and 2023-24 claiming exemption under Section 11. Subsequently, after the assessee filed Form No.10AB seeking regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), the Commissioner (Exemption) issued a notice dated 30.11.2023 through the ITBA portal seeking information and details to verify the genuineness of the activities of the trust. Compliance was required by 15.12.2023.
Since no compliance was furnished, the Commissioner (Exemption) issued another show cause notice dated 09.01.2024 asking the assessee to explain why its application for registration should not be rejected and why provisional registration should not be cancelled for failure to furnish the required documents. Compliance was required by 18.01.2024. The assessee again failed to furnish the details sought. Consequently, the Commissioner (Exemption) passed the impugned order rejecting the application for registration and cancelling the provisional registration granted earlier.
Before the Tribunal, the authorised representative submitted that the assessee could not comply with the first notice because the in-house accountant was unaware of the applicable timelines. With regard to the second notice, it was submitted that once the trustees became aware of the proceedings, the assessee started consolidating the required documents. However, since the data was voluminous, additional time was required. Accordingly, the assessee filed an adjournment request dated 29.01.2024 seeking extension of time till 13.02.2024. The authorised representative argued that despite the adjournment request being available on the IT portal, the Commissioner (Exemption) proceeded to pass the impugned order without considering the request. It was therefore urged that another opportunity be granted to furnish the required information and documents.
The Departmental Representative opposed the submissions and argued that adequate opportunities had already been granted to the assessee. According to the Revenue, the assessee repeatedly failed to comply with notices and did not furnish the documents and evidence called for by the Commissioner (Exemption). Therefore, the rejection of the application for non-compliance was justified.
After considering the rival submissions and examining the record, the Tribunal held that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice and fair play to restore the matter to the file of the Commissioner (Exemption) for fresh consideration. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (Exemption) to reconsider the application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) afresh and decide the matter on merits in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Assessee Represented by : Shri Sachin P. Kumar
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
