AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM,
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)] dated 23.09.2025 passed under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2025-26. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
•That the learned CIT(E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appellant’s application for registration under section 12AB without properly appreciating the charitable nature of the objects and activities of the appellant.
•That the impugned order is arbitrary, bad in law and void ab initio, as no satisfaction has been recorded regarding non-genuineness of activities, which is mandatory under section 12AB.
•That the learned CIT(E) failed to consider the replies and documents submitted and has proceeded merely on assumptions and presumptions.
•That adequate and effective opportunity of being heard was not granted, resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice.
•That at the stage of registration, only prima facie satisfaction regarding objects and genuineness of activities is required, which has been ignored by the learned CIT(E).
At the outset, we have noted that the Registry had identified delay of 24 days in filing of the appeal. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation petition attributing delay for 24 days to the circumstances beyond its control, we condone the delay of 24 days in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
Brief factual matrix of the case are that the appellant assessee is a registered charitable society engaged in promotion of Pahari culture, folk art, music, dance and other charitable cultural activities, functioning on non-profit basis since its inception. The assessee had applied for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act. The application of the assessee was processed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Delhi and an order dated 23.09.2025 was passed in Form No. 10AD, whereby the application for registration was rejected under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Act. We note that the rejection has been made mainly on the allegation that sufficient documentary evidences regarding activities, donors, beneficiaries and expenditure were not furnished.
We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted from the impugned orders of Ld. CIT(E) that the appellant was required to file documents in support of its claims which were not provided. We have noted that the ld. CIT(E) had issued notices dated 13.08.2025, 27.08.2025 and 15.09.2025, which were not admittedly complied by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to draw adverse conclusions and rejected the applications. Hence, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the registration and passed the order ex-parte and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. We are conscious of the fact that no appellant benefit by non-prosecution of his case. Be that as it may be, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the issues back to the Ld. CIT(E) for de-novo re-adjudication of the matter after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with all the statutory notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E ) and any non-compliance shall be viewed adversely. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.