NIRAMALA VIJAY AND PRIYA DAREKAR FOUNDATION,PUNE V. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

ITA 893/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Nirmala Vijay And Priya Darekar Foundation, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, rejecting their application for registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The initial rejection was based on the foundation's failure to provide sufficient documentation and explanations regarding their activities and finances as requested in a show cause notice. The Tribunal found that the foundation had partially complied with the initial notice but failed to respond to the subsequent show cause notice due to unavoidable circumstances. The Tribunal decided to set aside the matter to allow the foundation another opportunity to present their case with all necessary documentation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713357 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P. MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B. PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Tangible material
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.893/PUN/2025 Nirmala Vijay And Priya Darekar Foundation, Ground Floor/1st Floor, Plot No. 7, Hadapsar S.O., Pune-411028 PAN : AADTN5633P Vs. CIT Exemption, Pune अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Department by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 24-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 09.03.2024 in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). 2. There is a delay of 135 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. On perusal of the same, we are satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal is not intentional or deliberate but has occurred for the reasons mentioned in the affidavit. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339, condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; erred in law and on facts in rejecting appellant's application for registration u/s 12A of ITA, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.893/PUN/2025 2. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; ought to have appreciated that appellant's activities are genuine and bonafide, and as such, eligible for registration u/s 12A of ITA, 1961. 3. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; erred in law and on facts in not providing sufficient reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant, as provided u/s 12AB of the ITA, 1961; to submit the details / information. Appellant contends that, Appellant is keen to ensure complete and total compliance as so required, and the present situation is simply a fall-out of communication gap. 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter, clarify, explain, modify, delete any or all of the grounds of appeal, and to seek any just and fair relief.” 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 10.05.2024 through ITBA portal which was duly served on the assessee requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification contained therein by 27.05.2024 under the provisions of section 12AB(i)(b)(i) of the Act. On verification of the details/documents filed by the assessee in response to the said notice, the Ld. CIT(E) observed certain discrepancies which were communicated vide issue of another notice dated 03.09.2024 duly served upon the assessee via e-portal/email seeking compliance by 10.09.2024. The said discrepancies are reproduced below : “(i) You have not furnished activity note. Kindly furnish the note on activity giving details viz. dates and places of each activities carried out by your trust, details of beneficiaries, how they were identified, etc. (ii) Furnish the supporting credible evidences in respect with the activities carried out. In absence of any such tangible material in respect of proof of activities being carried out it is not possible to arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of activities and also to ascertain as to whether the activities are in line with the objects of the trust / institution. (iii) From the financial statements of FY 2020-21 and 2021-22, it is seen that no expenses are shown under object/ activities of the trust. Furnish explanation. (iv) In respect of donation details kindly furnish information in format viz. name of donors, PAN/ address of donors, amount of donation, mode of donation, receipt no. etc. Also furnish the copies of receipt issued to the donors by your trust. (v) Furnish copies of bills/invoices of expenses done on activities. 4.1 As the assessee failed to comply to the above show cause notice and not furnished any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. Having been unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about the genuineness of the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.893/PUN/2025 activities of the assessee trust, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application of the assessee and also cancelling the provisional registration earlier granted to the assessee on 23.09.2021 by observing as under : “7. Considering the above facts discussed in the show notice and discrepancies noticed and also that the assessee has not complied with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as the provisions of Rule 17A(2) of Income Tax Rules, 1962 in spite giving sufficient opportunities, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance of requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the assessee as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. 8. In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional registration granted on 23/09/2021 under section 12AB read with section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is hereby cancelled.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that most of the required documents were submitted in response to the initial notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E). Admittedly, there was non-compliance to the subsequent show cause notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E), however, it was not intentional but occurred on account of certain unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee which he demonstrated by the reasons stated in the affidavit of one of the trustee of the assessee trust. He therefore prayed that in the interest of justice an opportunity may be granted to the assessee to substantiate and present its case by furnishing all the detail/ documents sought for by the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh on merits after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. The Ld. DR had no objection the above request of the Ld. AR. 8. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the records and the paper book filed by the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee. We find that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee due to non- compliance to the second notice / show cause notice issued asking for certain clarification/documentary evidence as per the discrepancy noted by him including the lack of supporting evidence proving the genuineness of the charitable activities of the assessee trust. Such non-compliance has been explained to be a fall out of communication gap between the trustees of the Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.893/PUN/2025 assessee trust. Before us, the Ld. AR has submitted that most of the information/ details/ documents sought for by the Ld. CIT(E) were filed by the assessee in response to the initial notice and are available on his records. It is also the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(E) by filing all the requisite details/ documents as called upon by the Ld. CIT(E). Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case enumerated above, we are of the view that it would be judicially expedient and in the interest of justice and fair play, if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to consider the assessee’s application afresh and decide the same on merits, in accordance with fact and law after allowing one final opportunity of being heard to the assessee and present its case. Needless to say, the assessee shall provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant details/documentary evidence as may be required/called upon on the appointed date without seeking adjournment under any pretext unless required for sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We direct and order accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31st July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Astha Chandra) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 31st July, 2025. रदि आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, िररष्ठ दनजी सदचि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "