2015 (2) TMI 1320 - AT - Income Tax

Registration u/s 12AA - denial of claim as material required for formation of the satisfaction mandated by the Act is unavailable - HELD THAT - CIT in the order passed by him for rejecting the claim for registration u/s 12AA that the material required for formation of the satisfaction mandated by the Act is unavailable and therefore, it is held by CIT that the assessee has failed to fulfill the conditions for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act. Similarly, in his order for rejecting the claim of the assessee for registration u/s 80G, he has given a finding that the assessee has failed to fulfill the conditions for approval u/s 80G of the Act. Hence, we do not find any justification to interfere in these orders of learned CIT. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Rejection of registration u/s 12AA
- Rejection of registration u/s 80G

Rejection of Registration u/s 12AA:
The case involved the rejection of the assessee's application for registration u/s 12AA and u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act. The assessee raised grounds challenging the rejection, citing errors in law and facts by the CIT. The CIT's order was deemed without jurisdiction, illegal, and contrary to the relevant provisions of the Act. The assessee argued that the CIT misdirected himself on irrelevant considerations and failed to appreciate the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act. Despite the grounds raised, the assessee did not appear for the hearing, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Revenue's representative supported the CIT's order. The Tribunal, after considering the Revenue's submissions and examining the material on record, upheld the CIT's decision. The CIT had found that the assessee did not meet the necessary conditions for registration u/s 12AA, as the required material for satisfaction mandated by the Act was unavailable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the rejection of registration u/s 12AA.

Rejection of Registration u/s 80G:
The second issue concerned the rejection of the assessee's application for registration u/s 80G. The grounds raised by the assessee mirrored those in the first issue, challenging the CIT's decision as without jurisdiction, illegal, and contrary to the law. The CIT was accused of misdirecting himself on irrelevant considerations and failing to understand the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act. Despite being aware of the hearing date, the assessee did not appear, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Revenue's representative supported the CIT's order. The Tribunal reviewed the submissions and material on record and found that the CIT had correctly rejected the claim for registration u/s 80G. The CIT had determined that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions for approval under u/s 80G of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the rejection of registration u/s 80G.