SOUBHAGYA SINDHU TRUST,ANANTHAPUR V. ITO., WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

ITA 1099/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Soubhagya Sindhu Trust, which appealed against the decision of the learned CIT(E), Hyderabad, rejecting their application for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was based on the trust's failure to provide sufficient information in response to notices from the CIT(E). The Tribunal found that the trust had not received the subsequent notice, which led to the non-submission of required details, and thus decided to give the trust another opportunity to present its case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471483 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M. NARMADA
• Assessee Lawyers: P. VINOD
• Keywords: Set aside; Bonafide belief

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.1099/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2024-2025 Soubhagya Sindhu Trust, ANANTHAPUR. PAN AAMTS3614C vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, ANANTHAPUR. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri P. Vinod, Advocate For Revenue : MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 03.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 03.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G, A.M. : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 13.02.2024 of the learned CIT(E), Hyderabad, in rejecting the application filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB for registration u/sec.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”]. 2. At the very outset, there is a delay of 176 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed 2 ITA.No.1099/Hyd./2024 an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. We are satisfied with the delay reasons explained by the assessee in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and accordingly, the delay of 176 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned and proceed the decide the appeal on merits. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed an application in Form No.10AB seeking for registration u/sec.80G of the Act. During the proceedings before the learned CIT(E), notice dated 27.10.2023 was issued to produce copy of Memorandum of Association /Trust Deed for verification and to furnish a detailed reply on the specific information called for in the said notice. In response to the said notice, the assessee has submitted certain details. The learned CIT(E) issued show cause notice dated 17.01.2024 and called upon the assessee to submit other information as per earlier notice dated 27.10.2023. The assessee neither appeared nor filed any details. Therefore, the learned CIT(E) dismissed the application filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB and rejected the registration u/sec.80G of the Act. 3 ITA.No.1099/Hyd./2024 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the subsequent notice issued by the learned CIT(E) dated 17.01.2024 was mislead the attention of the assessee and the assessee was under bonafide belief that whatever information submitted in response to notice dated 27.10.2023 is sufficient and the learned CIT(A) will consider the application filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB for registration u/sec.80G of the Act. The assessee came to know the rejection of application filed by the assessee when the Chartered Accountant who logged into the ITBA portal for filing return of income for the assessment year 2024- 2025 and finds that the application filed by the assessee has been rejected by the learned CIT(E). Therefore, he submitted that the assessee could not file other information called for by the learned CIT(E) since the notice issued by the learned CIT(E) was not reached to the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that giving a chance to file relevant details called for by the learned CIT(E), the assessee will be able to file all the details in support of application filed in 4 ITA.No.1099/Hyd./2024 Form No.10AB and, therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the learned CIT(E) for consideration of the issue. 5. The Learned DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the learned CIT(E) and submitted that the assessee could not file relevant evidences called for by the learned CIT(E) in support of it’s application filed in Form No.10AB seeking for registration u/sec.80G of the Act. In absence of relevant details, the learned CIT(E) rightly rejected the application filed by the assessee and, therefore, the order of the learned CIT(E) should be upheld. 6. We have heard both the parties, considered the arguments of either side. We find that the assessee is registered u/sec.12AA of the Act has filed an application in Form No.10AB of the Act seeking for registration u/sec.80G of the Act. The learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee for want of information. The assessee has explained the reasons for not appearing before the learned CIT(E) and argued that if one more opportunity has been given, the relevant details in support of it’s application filed in Form No.10AB will be furnished to the satisfaction to the 5 ITA.No.1099/Hyd./2024 learned CIT(E). In our view, when the assessee is a Trust or Society registered u/sec.12A of the Act, the application filed for grant of exemption u/sec.80G of the Act needs to be considered on merits. In the present case, the learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee for want of information. Since the assessee has explained the reasons for not filing the details as called for, in our considered view, one more opportunity of hearing needs to be given to the assessee to justify it’s application filed in Form No.10AB. Thus, we set aside the order of the learned CIT(E) and restore the issue back to the file of learned CIT(E) for re-consideration of the issue. The assessee is directed to file relevant information in support of it’s application filed in Form No.10AB seeking for registration u/sec.80G of the Act without seeking any adjournment under any pretext. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6 ITA.No.1099/Hyd./2024 Order pronounced in the open Court on 03.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [K. NARASIMHA CHARY] [MANJUNATHA G] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 03rd March, 2025 VBP Copy to 1. Soubhagya Sindhu Trust, D.No.2/702, Ambedkar Nagar, Tadipatri, ANANTHAPUR – 515 411. State of Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anantapur 3. The CIT (E), Hyderabad 4. The DR ITAT “B” Bench, Hyderabad 5. Guard File //By Order// //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary : ITAT : Hyderabad Benches, Hyderabad. "