JANGAJANJAGRUTI JAN VIKAS SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,AKOLA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 EXEMPTION NAGPUR, NAGPUR

ITA 514/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Janajagruti Jan Vikas Sanstha, an appellant, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Exemption, Nagpur, as the respondent. The core issue revolved around the provisional registration granted by the CIT(E) which was later objected to and cancelled upon the application for final registration. The Tribunal found the CIT(E)'s actions to be unjustified and contrary to principles of natural justice, citing similar cases where technical errors in the application process did not warrant cancellation of registration. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by precedents from the Chennai Bench, emphasizing that procedural technicalities should not override substantive justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24343 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Sri Jeyamkonda Choleeswara Soundaranayaki Amman Kumbhabisheka Mala Kuzhu (2024), 159 502, TEDDY trust v/s CIT (E), ITA no. 1315/Chny./2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIPKUMAR SALUNKE
• Assessee Lawyers: AJIT PIMPELKHEDE
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice; Cancellation of registration

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.514 and 536/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : N.A.) Janajagruti Jan Vikas Sanstha Yeota Road, Basera Colony Malkapur, Akola 444 004 PAN – AABTJ2043F ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–2, Exemption, Nagpur ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ajit Pimpelkhede Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 10/02/2025 Date of Order – 21/03/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. These appeals by the assessee are emanating from the impugned orders of even date 22/07/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, [“learned CIT(E)”]. 2. After hearing both the parties, we find that the learned CIT(E) in both the appeals had granted the provisional registration without raising any objection on the sub-section at time of granting the certificate under Form 10AC and when the assesse applied for final registration, suddenly the learned CIT(E) objected on the provisional registration certificate and cancelled the same. The action of the learned CIT(E) is totally unjustified and against the natural justice. 2 Janajagruti Jan Vikas Sanstha ITA no.514 & 536/Nag./2024 3. The clause A or B is immaterial and only timing for application and technical in nature, this does not affect the merits of the case. The final registration under sub-clause (iii) does not speak about the clauses and just says about the activities, which means whatever the provisional registration is, if the activities are genuine and all the requirements for registration were followed the registration to be granted. 2. We further find that the Co–ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, in the matter of Sri Jeyamkonda Choleeswara Soundaranayaki Amman Kumbhabisheka Mala Kuzhu (2024), 159 502 and in the matter of TEDDY trust v/s CIT (E), ITA no. 1315/Chny./2023) has passed the order and it has been stated that the rejection of application just on the grounds of application is filed under wrong sub-section is just a technical error on the part of CIT and directed to reconsider the matter. In both the cases the appeal is allowed and remanded the back to Hon'ble Commissioner where Tribunal specifically stated that the wrong mentioning of sub-section does not a reason for cancellation of registration. 3. Similar are the cases before us. The above case law squarely covers the appeals before us. The facts and circumstances and the issue involved in these appeals being identical, respectfully following the same, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(E) and remit the appeals back to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to grant registration in accordance with law keeping in view the case laws relied upon supra. 3 Janajagruti Jan Vikas Sanstha ITA no.514 & 536/Nag./2024 4. In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/03/2025 Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 21/03/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "