AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 816
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce No. ITBA/EXM/F/F/EXM45/2024-25/1070733000(1) rejecting the approval u/s 80G of the Act. 2. First, we take up the ITA No.122/Bang/2025 for adjudication. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, hereinafter referred as the CIT(E) in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, facts, weight of evidence, probabilities and circumstances of the case. 2. The Hon'ble CIT(E) erred in not providing the adequate opportunity of being heard. The learned CIT(E) passed an order rejection the application without seeking any additional data before rejecting the application made for registration under section 12A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatements were duly attached to the application for registration in Form 10AB. 6. The Hon'ble CIT(E) failed to verify the documents and supporting materials submitted by the appellant. Additionally, the AO did not demonstrate the intent to approve the application, as there was no proper examination of the details provided by the appellant. The appellant had submitted Form 10B for the last three financial years in which financials are attached and uploaded the financial statements while applying for registration. However, the AO erroneously stated that the appellant had not submitted the financials, failing to properly verify the documents. The order hence deserved to be annulled. Reliance is placed on the order passed by the Pu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the appellant prays that the appeals may be allowed and justice rendered. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust is formed as a public charitable trust vide trust deed dated 06.01.2017 with the objective of establishing schools, colleges, eradicate hunger, poverty and malnutrition, provide aid to hospitals, nursing institutions etc. An addendum to the trust deed was made on 03.02.2024 with regards to the administration of new members to the trust. Further, the assessee trust had obtained the provisional registration u/s 12AB of the Act on 4.4.2022. The assessee trust applied for the final registration u/s 12AB of the Act on 8.5.2024 i.e.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ected the application for registration which is illegal and bad in law and accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted before the ld. CIT(E) to represent its case. 6. Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of ld. CIT(E). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. On going through the order of ld. CIT(E), we find that as the assessee had not submitted all the necessary details as required for registration u/s 12AB of the Act, and accordingly, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application in form 10AB dated 8.5.2024 filed for registration u/s 12AB of the Act. On going through the extract of HDFC bank as well as the note on activities as reproduced by the ld. CIT(E) in her orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Hon'ble CIT(E) erred in not providing the adequate opportunity of being heard. The learned CIT(E) passed an order rejection the application without seeking any additional data before rejecting the application made for registration under section 80G(5). Adequate opportunity of being heard is sin-non-quo and failing this the entire order would be bad in law. Further, the Hon'ble CIT(E) failed to observe the principle audi alteram partem. Reliance is placed on order passed by the Honorable Supreme court in case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403(SC). 3. The Hon'ble CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application made for registration under section 80G(5) without issuing show cause notice proposing to reject the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts while applying for registration. However, the AO erroneously stated that the appellant had not submitted the financials, failing to properly verify the documents. The order hence deserved to be annulled. Reliance is placed on the order passed by the Pune tribunal bench in case of Suprinit Tradinvest Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer (2023). 7. The Hon'ble CIT(E) erred in rejecting the appellant's application for registration under sections 80G without providing adequate reasons. Reliance is placed on the judgement of Pune tribunal bench in case of Kunashni Foundation vs. CIT(E) and order passed by the Indore tribunal bench in case of Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation vs. CIT(E) (2023), where it held that, the Commiss....