RANAVAV MADRESA CHARITY TALIMI TRUST,PORBANDAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2 , RAJKOT

ITA 179/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust appealing against the rejection of their application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad. The initial rejection was due to the application being found non-maintainable as the trust was already granted provisional registration under a different sub-clause. The trust argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to unawareness of the online proceedings, which was accepted by the ITAT, leading to the condonation of the delay and the setting aside of the CIT(E)'s order for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717522 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY PUNGLIA; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL; LD
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. & SHRI DIESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 179/RJT/2025 (Ǔनधा[रणवष[ / Assessment Year: (2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing). Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust, The Victoria Islami Madressa High School, Ranavav, Porbandar - 360575 Vs. ITO(Exemption), wd - 2 IT-Office, New Aayakar Bhavan Vatika, Rajkot - 360001 ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAATR2120A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 13/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 14/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the Rejection order dated 07.06.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad denying Registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, are as followed: 1) The Ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in law as well as on fact in rejecting application for registration u/s. 12A of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No. 179/RJT/2025 A. Y.2024-25 Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust v. CIT(E) 3. At the outset, that the appeal filed late by 225 days. The Ld. AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, supported by Affidavit. The application for delay is as under; “Mahemad Munaf Gafar Shivani trustee of RANAVAV MADRESA CHARITY TALIMI TRUST, residing at Ranavav do solemnly declare and affirms under. 1. That appeal before hon. ITAT was filed late by 225 days. 2. That Ld. CIT (Exemption) has passed order on 07.06.2024, which was served on 07.06.2024 and appeal before hon. ITAT, Rajkot bench was filed on 19.03.2025, hence there was delay of 225 days. 3. That the delay was occurred due to unawareness of passing online order by CIT (Exemption). 4. Appeal was immediately filed on gaining of knowledge of passing online order on receipt of call from department for payment of demand. 5. That there was no ill motive behind not filling appeal in time.” 4. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that the assessee was unaware about the online proceedings. That the Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee to explain the case. 5. On the contrary, the Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue has not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR. 6. We have heard both the parties. We note that the assessee has unaware about the proceedings. In the absence of any contrary material of fact available on record, there is a sufficient cause for delay in filing the present appeal u/s. 253(5) of the Act, empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after explain by the assessee. After considering the reason explained by the Ld. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No. 179/RJT/2025 A. Y.2024-25 Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust v. CIT(E) AR. In the interest of justice, we take a judicious view that we condoned the delay in filing appeal by 225 days. 7. Brief facts of the case that the applicant has filed an application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the IT Act in Form no 10AB electronically and as per data available, the same is filed in ITBA portal on 20/12/2023. This application was found to be prima-facie, non-maintainable and accordingly vide letter dated 27/03/2024 certain clarifications were sought from the applicant. In response to the same, the applicant has not submitted reply. On perusal of the details available on record, it is noticed that the applicant has been granted provisional registration under Sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A vide order on 27-05- 2021 for the period from A.Y.2021-22 to A.Y. 2023-24. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the application u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in lieu of 12A(1)(ac)(ii). In view of the above, the application filed on 20/12/2023 in Form No. 10AB, u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) is non maintainable and liable to be rejected as such, without going into the merits. Therefore, the present application is rejected for statistical purpose. Alternatively, the applicant can examine possibility to file fresh application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i)/12A(1)(ac) (iii) of the act on or before 30.06.2024 if same is permitted by Circular no.7 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024 issue by CBDT. 8. That the assessee has filed an appeal to challenge the validity of order of the Ld. CIT(E) before us on 07.06.2024. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 4 ITA No. 179/RJT/2025 A. Y.2024-25 Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust v. CIT(E) 9. During the course of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that the documents not submitted by the assessee because the assessee was not aware of online proceedings going on before the Ld. CIT(E). That the Ld. AR prayed that one more opportunity kindly given to the assessee for explained the case before the Ld. CIT(E). 10. On the Contrary, the Ld. DR for the revenue relied on the judgment of Ld. CIT(E), and the Ld. DR further not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR of the assessee. 11. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the several notices have been issued by the Ld. CIT(E) to submit the documents related to the case. Since, the appellant did not submitted the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E). We note that the assessee has not made the compliance with the notices for hearing issued by the Ld. CIT(E). We note that the assessee has not gave due care and attention to the case and negligent in pursuing the case before the assessment, and the assessee has also a non-cooperative attitude in pursuing the case. We direct the assessee to deposit a cost of Rs. 5,000/-, and the same is to be deposited with Prime Minster Relief fund (Government of India), the receipt is to be submitted with the Registrar of this Tribunal. Keeping in view, and in the interest of justice, an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(E). We set aside the order of Ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merit after giving due opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 5 ITA No. 179/RJT/2025 A. Y.2024-25 Ranavav Madresa Charity Talimi Trust v. CIT(E) 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot Ǒदनांक/ Date: 14/08/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "