ZAKAT INFAQ& SADAQAH TRUST,SRINAGAR V. CIT(EXPEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

ITA 212/ASR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Zakat Infaq & Sadaqah Trust, which appealed against the decision of the CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh, rejecting their application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was based on alleged deficiencies in factual evidence and the absence of sufficient submissions from the applicant. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided substantial documentary evidence, including financial statements and proof of activities, which were not adequately considered by the CIT (Exemptions). The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a sufficient opportunity to comply with the requirements for registration, leading to the decision to remand the case for further consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772121 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Charitable institution

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 Zakat Infaq & Sadaqah Trust, Wazir Bagh Lal Mandi, Jawahar Nagar, Jawahar Nagar S.O. (Srinagar) Gogi Bagh, Srinagar 190008 J & K. [PAN: AAATZ 3342G] (Appellant) Vs. C.I.T. (Exemptions), Chandigarh (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by : : Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C.A. & Sh. Sumit Lalchandani, Adv. Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-D R Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : 07.08.2025 28.08.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (Exemptions), Chandigarh dated 11.06.2024 rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com 2 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is filed belatedly by 190 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit sworn by Mr. Nayeem Shafi, the consultant of the assessee trust who was dealing with the tax matters of the assessee. The said Mr. Shafi has filed an affidavit that due to medical treatment of his minor daughter (Maryam Fatima) who was suffering from kidney problems since birth and was under continuous medical treatment, the delay in filing of this appeal has arisen because the consultant was pre-occupied with medical issues of his minor daughter and as such, it is prayed that since the delay was not intentional, and there was no fault of the assessee, the same may please be condoned and the appeal may please be admitted for hearing on merits. 3. The ld. DR has no objection. Considering the reasons submitted and the medical emergency faced by the assessee’s consultant, the delay of 190 (on hundred ninety) days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 4. There are 8 (eight) grounds of appeal taken by the assessee and in course of hearing before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the registration application has been rejected on the grounds of deficiency in factual evidence and in absence of submissions of the applicant. He further submitted that the assessee has Printed from counselvise.com 3 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 already filed documentary evidences of his activities including financial statement, bank statements and proof of activities conducted in online portal. 5. He further submitted that the assessee is a charitable trust engaged in carrying on charitable activity as per its objects and he disputed to the rejection of this registration application without allowing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the case and pointed out to the last notice issued on 07.06.2024, for further clarification. 6. The ld. AR stated that even though the assessee has fully replied to all earlier notices, further clarifications were raised on 07.06.2024 and without allowing proper opportunity to meet the said requirement, the rejection order was passed arbitrarily on 11.06.2024 and he submitted that even the substantial documents which has been filed earlier before the registration authority, has not been considered in its proper perspective. As such, he prays that a fresh opportunity may please be allowed for submission of all remaining documents as desired by the ld. CIT(E). 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(E). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and we find that sufficient time for compliance has not been allowed by the ld. CIT(E) and as such, we remand the matter back to the files of the ld. CIT(E) to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to file the remaining documentary evidences in Printed from counselvise.com 4 I.T.A. No. 212/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25 support of his contention and to reconsider the registration application afresh. The assessee is also directed to file all documentary evidences and submissions as desired by the ld. CIT(E) and to fully cooperate in the registration process for proper disposal of the case. 9. The assessee to be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 28.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order Printed from counselvise.com "