Case Law Details
Mahesh Shikshan Sanstha Vs CIT (ITAT Pune)
Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune recently addressed the case of Mahesh Shikshan Sanstha Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) regarding the rejection of an application under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. The rejection was based on the failure of the appellant to respond to notices issued under IT Rules 17A(2). This article delves into the details of the case, the arguments presented, and the ITAT’s directive for re-adjudication.
Detailed Analysis: The appeal arose from the rejection order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. The appellant, Mahesh Shikshan Sanstha, sought regular/final registration under section 12AB of the Act through Form No.10AB. The rejection was primarily due to the appellant’s failure to submit the required documents as mandated by rule 17A(2) of the Income Tax Rules.
The CIT(E) issued notices on two occasions, first on 15/06/2023 and later on 24/07/2023, providing opportunities for the appellant to rectify the deficiencies. However, the appellant did not comply with these notices, leading to the rejection of the application by the registering authority.
The appellant, represented by the Learned Authorized Representative (AR), argued non-compliance based on specific reasons and requested an additional opportunity. The AR emphasized the importance of registration for public charitable trusts, aligning with the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
