MAHARISHI DAYA NAND SIKSHA SAMITI,HARYANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3150/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 July 2025AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had relied on a limited part of the society's memorandum and had not considered evidence showing the imparting of education as an objective. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(E) to call for relevant information and decide the application afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) rejecting their registration applications under Section 12AB and 80G. The assessee contended that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration applications without providing adequate opportunity and considering all relevant documents. Whether the objectives of the society were properly considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 16.07.2025Pronounced: 16.07.2025

ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

The aforecaptioned appeals have been preferred by the same Assessee against the different order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals)-Chandigarh, ([in short (Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.03.2024 and 12.12.2024 for the Assessment Years 2023-24 and 2024-25.Since identical issues are involved in both the appeals, they are disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

1.1 The assessee has raised the following grounds in both appeals: ITA-3150/Del/2024 “1.That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT,E) has erred in rejecting registration application moved u/s 12AB even when the appellant was eligible for the same.

2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Worthy CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

3. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.

.-3150-24 & 790-25 Maharishi Dayanand Siksha Samiti ITA-790/Del/2025

1.

That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(E) has erred in rejecting registration application moved u/s 80G even when the appellant was eligible for the same.

2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Worthy CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

3.

That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that while passing the impugned order rejecting application u/s 12A of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) has observed that evidences do not establish running schools as one of the objectives of the Society. Ld. AR has drawn our attention to pages 13-14 of the PB to show the imparting education as per Education Policy is one of the objectives. While going through the impugned order we find that ld. CIT(E) has merely relied a limited part of memorandum of society describing only few of the objectives. Thus we consider it an appropriate case to give the assessee an opportunity to file the relevant .-3150-24 & 790-25 Maharishi Dayanand Siksha Samiti documents/information to the satisfaction of the ld.CIT(E). The issue is restored to the files of the ld.CIT(E) to call for relevant information on these documents and decide the application afresh as per law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeals are allowed, for statistical purposes only.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →