SHREE SANT SAVTA MAHARAJ VARKARI SAMPRADAYIK PRASADIK DINDI,PUNE V. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1147/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Shree Sant Savta Maharaj Varkari Sampradayik Prasadik Dindi against the decisions of the CIT, Exemption, Pune, which rejected their applications for registration under section 12A(1)(ac) and for approval under section 80G(5) of the IT Act. The Tribunal found that the CIT, Exemption, Pune had not provided adequate opportunity to the assessee to explain their case satisfactorily, particularly in light of the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic during which the assessee did not conduct activities or incur expenditures. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter back to the CIT, Exemption, Pune was based on the need for a fair hearing and proper examination of the assessee's activities and compliance with legal requirements.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712421 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT BOBDE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S. SHINGTE
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 Shree Sant Savta Maharaj Varkari Sampradayik Prasadik Dindi, Sohala Shenacha Mala Anandgram Javal Talegaon Sanaswadi Road, Dhamdhere, Shirur, Pune- 412208. PAN : AAOAS1340L Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: Both the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act filed on 28.03.2024 and denying the application for approval in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act filed on 27.03.2024. Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 16.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 2 ITA No.1148/PUN/2025 : 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee is a society registered with Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and has filed application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the IT Act on 28.03.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued on 21.05.2024 by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune through ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification. The desired information was furnished by the assessee. On verification of said information furnished by the assessee, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found certain discrepancies in the information furnished by the assessee and issued another notice on 27.08.2024. The assessee complied with the said notice. However, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune was not satisfied about the genuineness of the 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 and therefore rejected the application for registration and also cancelled the provisional registration granted to the assessee on 25.05.2022 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 3 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the IT Act. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has not provided proper opportunity to the assessee, & therefore the order is not justified. It was submitted that if Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune was not satisfied with the explanation, he should have had provided another opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. Accordingly, it was requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and further requested to provide one opportunity to submit the documents/explanation in support of application for registration. 4. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue placed heavy reliance on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find that admittedly the assessee made compliance to all the notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. It is the sole contention of the assessee that if the reply of the assessee was not satisfactory Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune should have had provided at-least one more opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. We also find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 4 Pune in his rejection order observed that the assessee has not shown any expenditure for financial years 2020-21 and 2021-22 and in this regard Ld. Counsel of the assessee contended that the above period pertains to Covid-19 Pandemic and therefore no activity was conducted and accordingly no amount was spent. Considering the totality of the facts of the case & in the interest of justice and without going into the merits of the case, we set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the application for registration afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to comply with the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and produce requisite documents/information in support of the application for registration, otherwise, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.1148/PUN/2025 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.1147/PUN/2025 : 7. The instant appeal is against the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune denying grant of approval u/s 80G(5) of the IT Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1147 & 1148/PUN/2025 5 Act. Since we have remanded the issue of grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) to the file of Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune for de novo adjudication, therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to remit the issue of grant of approval u/s 80G(5) as well to the file of Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune being consequential, for de novo adjudication. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.1147/PUN/2025 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 9. To sum up, both the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th day of July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 28th July, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "