PETANITY AND ANIMAL REHABILITATORS FOUNDATION,CHANDRAPUR V. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

ITA 165/NAG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Petanity And Animal Rehabilitators Foundation, a small trust based in Chandrapur, Maharashtra, which appealed against the decision of the CIT(Exemption), Pune. The CIT(Exemption) had rejected the trust's application for registration under sections 12AA/12AB of the Income Tax Act, citing non-compliance in providing necessary details about the trust's objects and activities. The trust, represented by advocate Shri Bhavesh Moriyani, argued that the delay in filing the appeal was unintentional, attributed to the lack of familiarity of its office bearers with electronic communication tools. The CIT-DR opposed the appeal, emphasizing the trust's failure to comply with earlier requests for information.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840279 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PANKAJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: BHAVESH MORIYANI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “NAGPUR” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 165/NAG/2025 (AY : 2025-26) (Physical hearing) Petanity And Animal Rehabilitators Foundation Chandrapur Sagar Enterprises, Madhuban Plaza, Near Mount Convent, Shivaji Nagar, Chandrapur, Maharashtra – 442401. [PAN: AAGAP6876N] Vs CIT(Exemption), Pune Room No. 322, 3rd Floor, ITO, PMT Building, Shankar Seth Road, Pune – 411037. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Bhavesh Moriyani, Advocate Revenue by Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT–DR Date of hearing 23.02.2026 Date of pronouncement 23.02.2026 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(Exemption), Pune dated 18.10.2024 in rejecting application for registration of trust under section 12AA/12AB of the Income Tax Act (Act). The ld. CIT(E) rejected the application in ex-parte proceeding and also cancelled provisional registration under section 12AB. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. AR of the assessee fairly submits that there is delay of about 78 days in filing present appeal. The assessee has already filed application for condonation of delay which is supported with affidavit of Devendra Odal Rapelli. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee is a small trust in a remote area of Chanderpur Printed from counselvise.com Petanity And Animal Rehdabilitators Foundation ITA 165/Nag/2025 2 District. The officer bearer of assessee is not much familiar with electronic gadget and use of with e–mail etc. The office bearer of assessee is using mobile phone only for the purpose of telephonic calls. The assessee could not realise about issuance of notice by ld. CIT(E). Thus, no compliance was made. Similarly, the assessee could not become aware on dismissal of application by ld. CIT(E). On realising that application of assessee under section 12AB has been rejected, the assessee filed present appeal before Tribunal. The delay is not intentional or deliberate. The assessee is interested to pursue their application on merit. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that one more opportunity may be allowed to contest the application on merit and matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(E). 3. On the other hand, learned Commissioner of Income Tax – Departmental Representative (ld. CIT–DR) for the Revenue opposed the plea of condonation of delay raised by assessee. On merit, the ld. CIT–DR submits that assessee has given an opportunity to file details about object and activities. The assessee failed to furnish such details. Hence, the assessee deserves no leniency at this stage. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the parties. Considering the submission of ld. AR on the plea of condonation of delay, we find that delay is not intentional or deliberate in filing appeal. Moreover, there is delay of 78 days in filing appeal. Considering the explanation furnished by ld. AR of the assessee, delay in filing appeal is condoned. Now adverting to the merits of the case. 5. We find that application of assessee for registration under section 12AB was rejected for the want of submissions in ex–parte order. Therefore, considering the Printed from counselvise.com Petanity And Animal Rehdabilitators Foundation ITA 165/Nag/2025 3 prayer of ld AR of the assessee for allowing one more opportunity, we deem it appropriate to restore to the file of ld. CIT(E) for considering the matter afresh. Needless to direct that before passing the order of ld. CIT(E) shall allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 23/02/2026 at the time of hearing Sd/– Sd/– KHETTRA MOHAN ROY PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 23/02/2026 Biswajit 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. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Nagpur Printed from counselvise.com "