Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's application for registration under Section 80G(5) was rejected by the CIT(E) because their application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) had already been rejected.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and restored the issue to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision, granting the assessee a fresh opportunity for hearing and filing evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the Section 80G(5) application was justified based on the rejection of the Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) application, and whether a fresh opportunity for hearing should be granted.
Sections Cited
80G(5), 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Assessment Year: 2024-25 Saurabh Mittal Foundation, Vs Ward Exemp 2(1), D-49, Second Floor, Delhi. Sarita Vihar, Madanpur Khadar Mark, Delhi – 110 076. PAN: AACBS5303G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate & Shri Vir Singh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 03.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), New Delhi, rejecting application u/s 80G(5) by holding that the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) had already been rejected.
Heard and perused the records. The application of the assessee u/s 80G(5) has been rejected on the basis that the application for registration u/s