IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 2162 &

2163/Bang/2024 Assessment Years : 2024-25 Smt. Pushpa Sarji Ramesh Charitable Trust, Sri Banashankari nilaya 50 The Income Tax ft Road, Officer, Gopalgouda Extension Ward – 1 & TPS, SO Vinobanagar, Shimoga.

Shimoga – 577 204. Vs.

Karnataka.

PAN: ABBTS1092A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CA Revenue by : Smt. S. Praveena, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 17-12-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25-02-2025

ORDER

PER BENCH These are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(E) both dated 24/10/2024 in which the registration u/s. 12AA and 80G were rejected and raised the following grounds.

“1. The Learned Commissioner has erred in law and on facts in passing an order rejecting the application under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act,1961, in the manner he did;

2. The Learned Commissioner ought to have granted additional time to comply with the requirements considering the nature of the Appellant;

3. The order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and therefore bad in law;

4. The Learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that the Appellant institution is a charitable institution Trust and that the Appellant had satisfied the conditions required and ought to have granted the recognition under section 12AB of the Act;

5. The Learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that the Appellant had not violated any of the conditions laid down in section 12AB of the Act and ought to have granted the recognition as prayed for.

6. The Order of the Learned Commissioner has fallen in error of facts as well as in law as the basis of rejection is based on an incorrect assumption of facts rendering the impugned order to be perverse;

7. The Learned Commissioner has erred in questioning the nature of activities without establishing any defect or infirmity in the documents as already submitted;

On the basis of the above grounds and other grounds which may be urged at the time of hearing with the consent of the Honourable Tribunal, it is prayed that the order passed under section 12AB of the Act, to the extent, it is against the Appellant, be quashed and the relief sought to be granted.”

ITA No. 2163/Bang/2024 “1. The Learned Commissioner has erred in law and on facts in passing an order rejecting the application under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act,1961, in the manner he did;

2. The Learned Commissioner ought to have granted additional time to comply with the requirements considering the nature of the Appellant;

3. The order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and therefore bad in law;

4. The Learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that the Appellant institution is a charitable institution Trust and that the. Appellant had satisfied the conditions required and ought to have granted the recognition under section 12AB of the Act;

5. The Learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated that. the Appellant had not violated any of the conditions laid down in section 12A13 of the Act and ought to have granted the recognition as prayed for.

6. The Order of the Learned Commissioner has fallen in error of facts as well as in law as the basis or rejection is based on an incorrect assumption of facts rendering the impugned order to be perverse;

7. The Learned Commissioner has erred in questioning the nature of activities without establishing any defect or infirmity in the documents as already submitted;

On the basis of the above grounds and other grounds which may be urged at the time of hearing with the consent of the Honourable Tribunal, it is prayed that the order passed under section 12AB of the Act, to the extent, it is against the Appellant, be quashed and the relief sought to be granted.”

2. Both the appeals are related to the same assessee and therefore we decided to take up both the appeals together and pass a com