SURYA KIRAN HEALTH & EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the rejection of the first application due to a technical mistake (wrong section) should not be the sole basis for rejecting the second application for delay. The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter to the CIT(E) for adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a Charitable Trust, applied for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The initial application was rejected for being made under the wrong section. A second application was filed, but it was also rejected by the CIT(E) on grounds of delay and not undertaking any activity.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the second application for 80G registration, after the first was rejected on technical grounds, should be condoned. Whether the CIT(E) can reject the application on merits without proper examination, solely on the grounds of delay and alleged lack of activity.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG&
Per Padmavathy S, AM: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [In short 'CIT(E)'] dated 28.06.2025 rejecting the registration sought by the assessee under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
The assessee is a Charitable Trust registered under Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 with Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. The assessee is registered under section 12A of the Act up to 31.03.2026 and is having provisional approval under section 80G granted up to 31.03.2024. The assessee made the application for final approval under
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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 →- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026