HEALTHY LIVES FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-5(1)(3), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 374/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2025Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)5 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(E) had not decided the application on merits and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to provide necessary evidence for its activities.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(E) who denied permanent registration. The assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) failed to consider their submissions and denied registration despite acknowledging its maintainability.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(E) properly adjudicated the assessee's application for permanent registration on merits and if the denial of registration was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Shailender Bajaj, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR
Hearing: 28.07.2025Pronounced: 31.07.2025
1.

The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.11.2024 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow [“Ld.CIT(E)”] in Appeal No.CIT Exemption, Lucknow/2024-25/12AA/12166 pertaining to assessment year NIL.

2.

The assessee has made the submissions in response to notice dated 18.10.2024, copy of which is filed in the Paper Book, submitted before us and submits that Ld.CIT(E) has failed to consider the same.

3.

We have heard the contentions of the Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. Looking to the facts and also considering the submissions, We find that Ld.CIT(E) has not decided the application of the assessee on merits though he himself has stated that the assessee has been given the provisional registration therefore, the application filed by the assessee for permanent registration is maintainable but Ld.CIT(E) has denied the registration u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(b) of the Act.

4.

Under these facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunities to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file the necessary evidences before the Ld. CIT(E) in order to establish the genuineness of its activity. With these directions, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 31.07.2025.

More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(b)

All 110 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →