SHRI RAM CHANDRA MISSION SHAHJAHANPUR,SHAHJAHANPUR V. CIT(E), LUCKNOW

ITA 98/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ram Chandra Mission, a trust, appealing against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Lucknow, which had dismissed their application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The dismissal was based on the CIT(E)'s dissatisfaction with the genuineness of the trust's activities. The appellant argued that they were not given adequate opportunity to respond to the show cause notice due to technical issues with the Income Tax e-filing portal, coinciding with the statutory deadline for filing audit reports. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and decided to remand the matter back to the CIT (Exemptions) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717670 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE EXPRESSED; R.K. AGARWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MUKUL GUPTA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.98/LKW/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 Shri Ram Chandra Mission R-23, Sector-11, Noida-201301. v. CIT(Exemption) Income Tax Office Lucknow. PAN:ABCAS7377Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Mukul Gupta, Adv Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Lucknow (“CIT(E)”, for short) dated 30.09.2024 for the assessment year 2024-25 whereby the Ld. CIT(E) dismissed the assessee’s application for registration under section 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short). The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. That the order passed by Ld. CIT(E) is bad in Law and against facts of the case. 2. That the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application made for registration u/s 12AB. 3. That the Ld. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the registration on the baseless grounds. 4. That the Ld. CIT(E) has not given adequate opportunity of being heard before rejecting the application for registration. 5. That the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application relied on the disputed matter which are sub-judice and not finalized. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any of the ground of appeal.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.98/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 3 2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant a trust, filed an application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act on 30.03.2024 alongwith Form No. 10AB prescribed under Rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”, for short). The said application was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(E) on the basis that he was unable to arrive at the satisfaction about the genuineness of the activities of the trust. Therefore, the application of the assessee was rejected. Aggrieved against this, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short), the assessee filed a brief synopsis stating as under: - “A show cause notice (SCN) dated 27.09.2024 was issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and received by the appellant on 28.09.2024 (Saturday). The reply to the said SCN was required to be filed by 30.09.2024. However, due to the statutory last date for filing of audit reports under the Act falling on the same day (30.09.2024), the Income Tax e-filing portal was experiencing severe technical glitches and was not functioning properly. As a result, despite best efforts the appellant was unable to upload the reply within the stipulated time.” 3. At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative (“AR”, for short) submitted that the learned CIT (Exemptions) rejected the application u/s 12AB of the Act without providing reasonable opportunity for submitting the details called for by the learned CIT (E). He further submitted that the show cause notice was issued by the Ld. CIT(E) on 27.09.2024 and which was received next day. He further submitted that due to the technical glitches and insufficient time, the assessee could not file the relevant documents within the stipulated time upto 30.09.2024. He further submitted that there was inadequate time between issue date and compliance date in respect of the aforesaid notice. He submitted that the matter in dispute in this appeal in respect of appellant’s applications u/s 12AB of the Act should be restored back to the file of the learned Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.98/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 3 CIT (E) with the direction to pass de novo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing and in the specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us; we set aside the impugned order of learned CIT (E) and restore the matter regarding the appellant’s application u/s 12AB of the Act; back to his file with the direction to consider the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12AB of the Act afresh, and to pass de novo order after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 14/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 14/08/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "