RENTLY EMPLOYEE CARE FUND,COIMBATORE V. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

ITA 1060/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Rently Employee Care Fund, which appealed against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, who had rejected their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The rejection was based on the incorrect filing of Form 10AB, whereas the intention was to apply for regularization under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had not provided a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to explain their case before rejecting the application, leading to the decision to remit the matter back for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708876 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: H. YESHWANTH KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी एबी टी. वक , \u0011ा ियक सद! एवं \u0019ी जगदीश, लेखा सद! क े सम( BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1060/Chny/2025 Rently Employee Care Fund, Block A2, 1st Floor, Span Ventures SEZ, Rathinam Techzone, Pollachi Main Road, Coimbatore – 641 021. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai. [PAN: AAETR 4860P] (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate :;थ की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 16.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai [hereinafter “CIT(E)”] dated 27.12.2024 in rejecting approval for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). ITA No.1060/Chny/2025 Rently Employee Care Fund :- 2 -: 2. There is a delay of 47 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons that the delay was primarily caused due to a real-time alert, which prevented timely action on the matter. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. The only ground of appeal in this appeal of the assessee is against the rejection of application filed in Form 10AB u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. The Trust had obtained provisional registration u/s. 12A in Form-10AC dated 31.12.2021 from A.Y 2022-23 to 2024-25. The Ld. CIT(E) after examining trust’s activity, rejected the application. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(E). 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has stated that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application without providing reasonable opportunity, therefore one more opportunity may be granted in the interests of justice to substantiate its claim. ITA No.1060/Chny/2025 Rently Employee Care Fund :- 3 -: 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application on the ground that application has been filed wrongly in Form 10AB for regularization u/s 12A(1)(ac) of the Act, though the intention of assessee for making application is different from what it has applied. The Ld AR has submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has not issued show cause before holding the application not maintainable, therefore proper opportunity has not been provided to explain its case . In our considered view, the rejection of the application without providing the proper opportunity is not justified. Considering the submissions and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration of the assessee's application in accordance with law, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/-. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the Ld. CIT(E). We ITA No.1060/Chny/2025 Rently Employee Care Fund :- 4 -: also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(E) on the date of hearing without fail and submit all the relevant documents sought for by the Ld. CIT(E). In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 16th day of July, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक ) (ABY. T. Varkey) \u0011ाियक सद! / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा सद! /Accountant Member चे\u0010नई/Chennai, \u0013दनांक/Dated: 16th July, 2025. EDN/- आदेश क\u0016 \bितिल\u0019प अ\u001aे\u0019षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\b/Appellant 2. थ\b/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u0010/CIT, Salem 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0019 फाईल/GF "