Smart Commute Foundation Vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ONE MISSED E-MAIL CANNOT BURY CHARITY—RENEWAL u/s 12AB RESTORED FOR AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY
The Mumbai ITAT has held that an application for renewal of registration u/s 12AB should not be rejected merely because the charitable institution failed to furnish documents in response to one notice, particularly when it claims that it was unaware of the communication sent through e-mail & is ready to produce the required material. Emphasising natural justice, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing a sufficient & effective opportunity.
Facts of the case
The assessee, Smart Commute Foundation, filed an application in Form No. 10AB on 30.09.2025 seeking renewal of its registration u/s 12AB. The application was made u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Upon examining the application, the CIT(E) noticed that it was incomplete & that all the documents prescribed under Rule 17A(2) had not been furnished.
The CIT(E), therefore, issued a notice dated 30.01.2026 calling upon the assessee to furnish the complete set of documents & information required for examining its application.
According to the CIT(E), the assessee did not comply with all the requirements of the notice before the order was passed. In the absence of the relevant documents, the CIT(E) stated that he was unable to record the statutory satisfaction regarding the objects of the institution, genuineness of its activities & compliance with other laws material for achieving its objects.
