SRISHTI SOCIAL & EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 26/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 July 2025AY 2025-2026Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application without providing the appellant an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) to decide afresh.

What were the facts?

The appellant filed an application for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The application was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) for non-compliance with notices and failure to produce documents. The appellant neither appeared nor submitted documents, and the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application without a hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the application for approval under Section 80G without affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellant is valid?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Hearing: 08/07/2025Pronounced: 16/07/2025

Shristi Social &Educational Vs. CIT(Exemption) Welfare Delhi L-1/1A Sani Bazar Road SangamVihar, Delhi PAN: AAEAS5938G Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing 08/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 16/07/2025 ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(Exemption) (‘Ld. CIT(E) for short), Delhi dated 25/11/2024.

2.

The appellant filed an Application for approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The said application has been rejected vide order dated 25/11/2024 on the ground that the Appellant failed to comply with the notices and failed to produce requisite documents in support of the claim, which is under challenged before us.

3.

None appeared for the Assessee. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perusing the material available on record.

4.

The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Appellant has not complied with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) and not produced any documents in support of the claim, thus the order impugned has been rightly passed by the Ld. CIT(E), therefore, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

5.

We have heard the Ld. Department's Representative and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for want of documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant and the Appellant has not been heard before passing the orders impugned.

Thus, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce any/all documents in support of its claim.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →