SURAJ MAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E)'s order was silent on the manner of service of notice to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to provide the assessee with an opportunity to submit the required documents.
What were the facts?
The assessee society's applications for registration under sections 80G and 12AB were rejected by the CIT(E) for non-submission of necessary documents and lack of evidence regarding the genuineness of charitable activities. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) properly considered the submissions and evidence provided by the assessee before rejecting the registration applications? Whether the assessee was granted sufficient opportunity to present their case?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & 5217/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2025-26 Suraj Mal Charitable Society, Vs CIT (E), GI-24, Industrial Area, Delhi. Lawrence Road, Delhi – 110 035. PAN: AARAS2358B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 30.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 18.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (E), Delhi, rejecting the applications for grant of registrations u/ss 80G and 12AB of the Act, respectively.
None appeared for the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeals. Heard ld. DR. On perusing the record, we find that while passing the impugned order, the ld. CIT(E) has observed that necessary documents were not filed leading to a conclusion that the genuineness of the charitable activities is not
More judgments on Section 80G
- Savan Dayalal Ladani, Rajkot vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1)…ITA 575/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Pareshbhai Savjibhai Khunt, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward - 2(2)(3), RajkotITA 842/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026