2021 (10) TMI 257 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal grants appeal for trust registration application, emphasizing procedural fairness and rectification over technicalities.

The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the trust's registration application under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act due to a ... Application for registration of trust u/s 12AA rejected - mismatch in the name mentioned in Form 10A vis-à-vis name mentioned in the trust deed - HELD THAT:- CIT(Exemption), Bhopal was not justified in rejecting the claim for a mere mistake in the spelling of the name of the trust. He ought to have provided an opportunity to the assessee trust to rectify this error. No other observation has been made by Ld. CIT(Exemption), Bhopal pointing out any error in the details filed by the assessee in order to reject the claim of the assessee deserving to be registered u/s 12AA. We set aside the issue of grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act to Ld. CIT(Exemption), Bhopal and direct him for examining it afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard - Appeal of assessee allowed for statistical purposes. Issues involved:1. Rejection of application for registration of trust u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on mismatch in the name of the society in Form 10A and the trust deed.2. Denial of reasonable opportunity of being heard by the CIT Exemptions Bhopal.Analysis:Issue 1: Rejection based on name mismatchThe appellant challenged the rejection of the application for registration of the trust under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act due to a discrepancy in the name of the society as mentioned in Form 10A compared to the trust deed. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application citing the difference in names, leading to the conclusion that the documents submitted pertained to a different entity. The tribunal noted that the rejection solely based on a spelling mistake was unjustified. It was emphasized that the CIT should have allowed the trust an opportunity to rectify the error instead of outright refusal. The tribunal found no other discrepancies in the details submitted by the assessee, indicating that the rejection was unwarranted solely on the basis of the name mismatch.Issue 2: Denial of reasonable opportunityThe appellant also contended that no reasonable opportunity of being heard was provided by the CIT(Exemption) in the process. The tribunal acknowledged the delay in filing the appeal and condoned the delay of 6 days, admitting the appeal for hearing. It was established that the delay was due to the lack of familiarity with the filing procedures and due dates by the office personnel. Considering the circumstances, the tribunal deemed it necessary in the interest of justice to allow the appeal and provide the assessee with a fair opportunity to present their case. The tribunal directed the CIT(Exemption) to re-examine the grant of registration under section 12AA after ensuring no mismatch in names and granting a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to be heard.In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes, setting aside the rejection based on a minor name discrepancy and emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity for rectification. The decision highlighted the need for procedural fairness and rectification of errors rather than outright refusal based on technicalities.