SHREE SAMI PANJARAPOLE SAMI,SAMI V. CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2507/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shree Sami Panjrapole Sami, who appealed against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, which rejected their application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was primarily due to the non-compliance in providing necessary documents as required by Rule 17A(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of non-compliance, including the absence of the counsel during the proceedings, and decided to set aside the matter back to the CIT(E) for re-evaluation, provided the assessee pays the imposed cost.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833499 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALPESH PARMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: HASMUKH V DOSHI

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Shri TR Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha , Accountant Member Shree Sami Panjrapole Sami, MU. SAMI, SAMI, Patan - 384245 Gujarat PAN: AABTS3762N (Appellant) Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Hasmukh V Doshi, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 29-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 03-02-2026 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/ORDER PER : NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (in short ‘the CIT(E)’) dated 29.10.2025 rejecting the application for grant of approval under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had made an application for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the ITA No. 2507/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year : NA Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 2507/Ahd/2025 A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption) 2 Act by filing Form No. 10AB. The Ld. CIT(E) noticed that the assessee did not furnish all the documents enlisted in Rule 17A(1) along with the application. The Ld. CIT(E) had allowed opportunities to the assessee to furnish the details vide notice dated 08.09.2025 and 08.10.2025. However, there was no compliance to the notices. Therefore, the application of the assessee was rejected as the Ld. CIT(E) was not satisfied about the genuineness of the activities of the trust & that the same were in consonance with the objects of the trust. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal: 1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act. 2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has not provided reasonable opportuņity of being heard as provided under Second Proviso to Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal. 4. Shri Hasmukh V Doshi, Ld. AR appearing for the assessee explained that the non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) was due to the fault of the Counsel who did not attend the proceedings. The Ld. AR requested that the assessee is engaged in charitable Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 2507/Ahd/2025 A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption) 3 activities and, therefore, another opportunity may be allowed to furnish the documents as required by setting aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). 5. Per contra Shri Alpesh Parmar, Ld. CIT-DR submitted that he has no objection if the matter was set-aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee. 6. We have considered the submissions of the assessee. We do not find any reasonable explanation for non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E). In fact, the assessee was not careful and vigilant enough while filing the application in Form No. 10AB of the Act, as the documents enlisted in Rule-17A(1) were not attached along with the application. Thereafter, no compliance was made to the notices of the Ld. CIT(E) and the details and documents as required were not furnished. We therefore, deem it proper to impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- on the assessee, which should be deposited in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund” within a period of 15 days from the receipt of this order. Subject to the payment of cost, the Ld. CIT(E) is directed to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the details and documents as required and thereafter, re-adjudicate the application of the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply before the Ld. CIT(E) and produce the document and clarification as required by him. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 2507/Ahd/2025 A.Y. NA Shree Sami Panjarapole Sami vs. CIT (Exemption) 4 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This order is pronounced in the Open Court on 03/02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 03/02/2026 Nk True Copy आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेशक\u0006 क\u0006 क\u0006 क\u0006 \u0007ितिलिप \u0007ितिलिप \u0007ितिलिप \u0007ितिलिपअ ेिषत अ ेिषत अ ेिषत अ ेिषत/ Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Reven ue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेशसे, उप/सहायकपंजीकार \u0001 \u0001 \u0001 \u0001 अपीलीयअिधकरण,अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "