Loading judgment…
Facts
Susmit Foundation applied for registration under Section 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act. The applicant provided some documents but the Ld. CIT(E) noted incomplete details and rejected the application after giving a final opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(E) failed to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee and violated principles of natural justice. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was restored to the Ld. CIT(E) for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(E) provided adequate opportunity of hearing and whether the principles of natural justice were followed while rejecting the application for registration.
Sections Cited
12AB(1)(b)(ii)B, 80G(ii)(b)(B), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 80(G)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The appeals filed by appellant/assessee are against separate orders dated 30.12.2025 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(E)’] rejecting application in Form 10AB for grant of registration under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)B and 80G(ii)(b)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that applicant-assessee is a society and date of incorporation is 27.07.2022. The applications in Form 10AB for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and section 80(G) of the Act were filed on 22.06.2024. The applicant was issued a questionnaire dated 08.07.2024 with a request to furnish details/documents/clarifications in support of its claim of registration. In response thereto, applicant filed detailed/copy of certificate of incorporation and memorandum of association, copy of bank statement, financial statement for the financial year 2022-23 to 2023-2024, form 10AC under Section 12A and 80G of the Act. On perusal, it was noted by Ld. CIT(E) that applicant/assessee has not submitted complete details, hence, he further afforded an opportunity vide letter dated 04.12.2024 to provide all the required details with the instructions that no further opportunity shall be granted being limitation matter. Ld. CIT(E) through orders dated 30.12.2024 rejected both the applications.
Being aggrieved, appellant/applicant filed present appeal.
In the grounds of appeal, the appellant/applicant submitted that Ld. CIT(E) failed to give adequate opportunity of being heard to the applicant to submit documents and details in violation of principles of natural justice.
5. Learned Departmental Representative for the Department of Revenue submitted that applicant had failed to file relevant documents and all necessary details.
From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that learned CIT(E) rejected applications by observing discrepancies/non-filing of evidence/submissions of documents.
In view of above material facts, in the interest of substantial justice, impugned orders dated 30.12.2025 of Learned CIT(E) are set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Learned CIT(E) for fresh decision in accordance with law. The appellant/applicant shall be afforded fair opportunity of hearing and filing of documents.