SIDDHAKALA VISHWASHATA MANDAL, MUMBAI V. CIT (EXEMPTION) , MUMBAI

ITA 1733/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves four different trusts appealing against the rejection of their applications for registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai. The rejections were primarily due to the trusts' failure to provide complete information and documents as required, despite multiple notices. The Tribunal found that the trusts were not aware of the need to furnish the required information and directed them to reapply with complete documentation. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the CIT (Exemptions) to decide on these applications within the statutory time limit.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299471 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 06-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM ITA No. 1731/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Si ddhak al a B hakt a Mandal 1 st F l oor, P it l e W adi, H anum an R oad, Vil e P arl e (E as t), Mum bai-400 057 Vs. CIT (Exemption) Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAETS2965E ITA No. 1733/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Si ddhak al a V is hwa shat Mandal H ous e N o.2/ 16, Babhai , L.t. R oad, Bori val i (W est) Mum bai-400 091 Vs. CIT (Exemption) Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADTS9608M ITA No. 1734/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Si ddhak al a V is hwa stha Mandal R oom N o. 1, V aij al C hawl , Jai B hawani Mar g, Am bol i A ndher i (W ) Mum bai-400 058 Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AACTS3779A ITA No. 1735/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shr ee Si ddhak al a Vis hwath Mandal K andiv al i W Pl ot N o. 517, Sai Kr upa D att a Ma ndi r R oad, D ahanuk ar W adi, Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Mumbai Page | 2 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 Kandi v al i (W ), Mum bai-400067 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADTS9609L Assessee by : Mr. Sharad Vaze, AR Revenue by : Mr. Raj Singh Meel, Sr. AR Date of hearing: 07.08.2023 Date of pronouncement : 17.08.2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. These are the appeals preferred by four different trusts against the order passed under section 12 AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), by The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai involving identical facts and therefore, disposed of by this common order. 02. These four appeals are as under:- a. ITA No. 1735/Mum/2023 is filed by Shree Siddhakala Vish wath Mandal Kandivali W [ PAN AADTS9609L] against the order for registration or approval or rejection / cancellation passed by The Commissioner Of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Mumbai dated 10 th March, 2023 rejecting the application in form number 10AB seeking registration under section 12 AB of the Act for the reason that application filed by the assessee was not complete, all the documents required to be accompanying the applications were not furnished Page | 3 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 despite a notice issued to the assessee on 25 th January, 2023 and reminder also on 21 st February, 2023. Therefore, the learned CIT(Exemption) held that he is unable to arrive at the satisfaction on objects of the trust, genuineness of the activities and various parameters mentioned under section 12 AB of the Act within the time limit provided to decide the issue on or before 31 st March, 2023 and hence, rejected the application of the assessee. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal. b. ITA No. 1731/Mum/2022 is filed by Siddhakala Bhakta Mandal [PAN AAETS2965E] against the order for rejection of recognition under section 12AA of the Act, by CIT [Exemptions], Mumbai dated 10 th March, 2023 seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act because of the reason that despite 2 notices issued by the learned CIT(exemptions), the assessee did not furnish the information required. Therefore, in view of statutory time limit to decide the application before 31 st March, 2023, the learned CIT (Exemptions) could not have arrived at the satisfaction required about the object of the trust and genuineness of the activities and therefore, the application of the assessee was rejected. The assessee is aggrieved with that order and is in appeal before us. c. ITA No. 1734/Mum/2023 is filed by Siddhakala Vish wa stha Mandal [ AN AACTS3779S] against the order rejecting registration under section 12 AB of Page | 4 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 the Act, passed by CIT [exemptions] Mumbai on 10 th March, 2023 as the assessee failed to furnish the information despite 2 notices issued and due to this the learned CIT[Exemptions] was not in a capacity to obtain satisfaction about the object of the trust, genuineness of the activities within the time limit available up to 31 st March, 2023 and therefore, the application seeking registration under section 12 AB of the Act filed by the assessee was rejected. The assessee is aggrieved with that order and is in appeal before us. d. ITA No. 1733/Mum/2023 is filed by SIDDHKALA VISHWASTHA MANDAL [PAN AADTS9608M] Mumbai against the order passed by CIT[Exemptions]; Mumbai dated 10 th March, 2023 rejecting the recognition of the trust under section 12 AB of the Act against the application made by the assessee in form number 10 AB as same was incomplete. Despite two notices the assessee did not comply with the same, therefore, the learned CIT [exemptions] was unable to obtain satisfaction about the object of the trust and genuineness of the activities within the time available up to 31 st March, 2023 and accordingly, the application made by the assessee was rejected. The assessee is aggrieved with the same. 03. The learned Authorized Representative in ITA No. 1734/M/2023 stated that assessee was not aware of the requirement of furnishing information though as per the Page | 5 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 understanding of the assessee for number 10 AB of the Act, was filed with all the relevant details. The learned Authorized Representative further stated that that two notices issued by the CIT [Exemptions] were not received by the assessee and if same were available in the ITBA portal, assessee could not reply to them because the trust was not aware about such requirement. He further stated that all the information is available on record and if require it can be submitted once again before the learned CIT [Exemption], if relief is granted to the assessee to go back. He submitted that identical facts are prevailing in all these four appeals. 04. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that CIT[Exemption] was required to pass an order on or before 31 st March, 2023. When he looked at application of the assessee in form number 10 AB of the Act, it was not containing the relevant information which is required to obtain the satisfaction of the CIT [Exemption] about object of the trust and genuineness of the activities. In absence of any such information, the learned CIT [Exemption] was required to pass an order on or before 31 st March, 2023 and therefore, the application for grant of registration of the assessee was rejected. No infirmity can be pointed out in such an order. 05. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the facts before us. In this case registration under section 12 AA of the Act was sought by the trust. The trust could not furnish the information as stated by the learned CIT [Exemption] in paragraph number 3 of his order. Page | 6 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 Therefore, it is pointed that the learned CIT [Exemption] could not have satisfied himself about the object of the trust and genuineness of the activities as required under section 12 AB (1) (b) of the Act and therefore, he rejected the application as it was required to be disposed of in a time bound manner. It is also pleaded before us that the 2 notices issued by CIT [Exemption] could not be responded because trust was not having knowledge about such notices issued through ITBA portal. In view of above facts and circumstances, we direct the assessee trust to once again make an application before CIT [Exemption] for registration of those trust in prescribed format and complete in all respect also comply with the two notices already issued and submitted those details within 90 days from the date of this order. Thereafter, the learned CIT [Exemption] is directed to dispose these applications in accordance with the law. Accordingly, solitary ground of appeal in all these 4 appeals is allowed with above directions. 06. In the result, all these 4 appeals are allowed as directed above for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Mumbai, Dated: 17.08.2023 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS & Dragon Page | 7 ITA No.1731, 1733 to 1735/Mum/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai