KANISHKA FOUNDATION, MUMBAI V. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

ITA 1732/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1016 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 03-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

P a g e | 1 ITA No.1732/Mum/2023 Kanishka Foundation Vs. CIT(Exemption) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1732/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2022-23) Kanishka Foundation 14 Palm Spring, Near Chandan Cinema Juhu JVPP Vile Parle (W) Mumbai – 400 094 Vs. CIT(Exemption) Mumbai स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AACTK5751G Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant by : Sharad A Vaze Respondent by : Biswanath Das Date of Hearing 04.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 04.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(Exemption) dated 19.04.2023 for A.Y. 2022- 23. The assessee has raised the following grounds before me: “1. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Mumbai, is not justified in rejecting the registration on the basis of non- submission of documents by the assessee, as the assessee was not aware of the requirements. The application for registration u/s 12AA be restored by setting aside his order dt. 10.03.2023. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.” P a g e | 2 ITA No.1732/Mum/2023 Kanishka Foundation Vs. CIT(Exemption) 2. Fact in brief is that the assesse trust filed an application in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act. The ld. CIT(Exemption) on verification of the application in form 10AB filed by the assesse found that application was incomplete and all the documents required to be accompanying the application were not furnished. Therefore, various notices were issued to the assessee to furnish the complete set of documents mentioned in Rule 17A(2) of the I.T Rule. 3. The ld. CIT(Exemption) held that assessee had not made any compliance to the notices issued for furnishing the required documents, therefore, application seeking registrar u/s 12AB of the Act was rejected. 4. During the course of appellate proceeding before me the ld. counsel submitted that assessee trust was recently created and there was no permanent employee engaged to look into the notices received through e-mails, therefore, no compliance could be made. The ld. Counsel because of not keeping track on the notices issued through emails requested for providing another opportunity to adjudicate the case of the assessee on merit. On the other hand, the ld. D.R supported the order of lower authorities. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application filed by the assessee seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act on the ground that inspite of giving notices no compliance has been made from the side of the assessee. After considering the submission of the assessee it is observed that assessee could not make compliance P a g e | 3 ITA No.1732/Mum/2023 Kanishka Foundation Vs. CIT(Exemption) as the trust has not employed any permanent staff since it was recently created. Looking to the above facts and circumstances we consider it appropriate to restore the case to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for deciding denovo on merit as discussed above after affording opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the ld. CIT(Exemption) without any failure, therefore, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.10.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Singh Karhail) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 04.10.2023 Rohit: PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.