AASHNA VIKAS TRUST,AHMEDABAD V. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1408/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Aashna Vikas Trust, which appealed against the decisions of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, rejecting its applications for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The initial rejections were based on the Trust's failure to respond to notices regarding the genuineness of its activities. The Tribunal found that the Trust provided a reasonable explanation for its non-response and had documented its charitable activities. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to give the Trust another opportunity to present its case, emphasizing the importance of these registrations for the Trust's operations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 776900 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2025
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. P. RASTOGI
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL K. PATEL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA; 12A; 80G

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1407 & 1408/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: NA) Aashna Vikas Trust, A-302, Silver Gardenia, Gota, Ahmedabad-382481 [PAN: AAHTA 6114 C] The CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate Revenue by: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT : Delay Condoned. These two appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(E)”], (i) order dated 13.11.2024, rejecting the assessee’s application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”); and, (ii) order dated 15.11.2024, rejecting the assessee’s application for approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, on the ground that the assessee did not possess a valid registration under section 12A. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-trust filed an application in Form No. 10AB seeking regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. The application was filed pursuant to the provisional registration granted earlier under section 12AA of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish evidence regarding the genuineness of its activities, despite issuance of notices dated 27.08.2024 and 16.10.2024 via email. It was further noted by Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1407 & 1408/Ahd/2025 Aashna Vikas Trust Vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year : NA - 2– the Ld. CIT(E) that the assessee neither filed any submissions nor sought any adjournment during the proceedings. 3. Subsequently, the application u/s 80G was rejected by the CIT(E) vide separate order dated 15.11.2024, solely on the ground that the assessee did not have a valid registration under section 12A, which is a pre-condition for granting approval under section 80G. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee trust was formed with genuine charitable intent and registered with the Charity Commissioner in 2019. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee-trust is indeed carrying out genuine charitable activities, but due to communication issues, it failed to respond to the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(E), which led to the rejection of its application. The Ld. AR also submitted that the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(E) through email to the address : [e-mail] was inadvertently overlooked as the assessee-trust's work was primarily field-based and mobile in nature. The Ld. AR submitted that this was an unintentional omission and not a case of deliberate non-compliance. With respect to the 80G application, it was submitted that the rejection was consequential upon denial of registration under section 12A, and if registration is restored, the application under section 80G should also be reconsidered. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E) stating that there was no compliance with the notices issued. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee trust was granted provisional registration under section 12AA and filed applications for regular registration and 80G approval within the prescribed time. The application under section 12A was rejected on the ground of non-response to the notices, and the 80G application was rejected on the basis Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1407 & 1408/Ahd/2025 Aashna Vikas Trust Vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year : NA - 3– that valid registration under section 12A was not available. However, we find that the assessee has provided a reasonable explanation regarding the delay and has also placed on record details of the activities carried out, such as maintaining 70 Gir cows in the Gau Shala, having audited accounts, filing returns etc.. We are, therefore, of the view that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to present its case before the Ld. CIT(E), along with all supporting documentary evidence, especially since the denial of 80G approval is directly linked to the denial of section 12A registration. 7.1 In view of the above, we set aside both the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matters to his file for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the proceedings and furnish all necessary documents to substantiate its claim for registration. The Ld. CIT(E) shall decide the matters afresh in accordance with law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 8. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 17.09.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 17/09/2025 **btk आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(E)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "