SHREE LAXMI NARAYAN DIVYA DHAM,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION DELHI, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had not properly examined the details of expenses submitted by the assessee, particularly regarding free distribution of meals ('langar and bhog'). The matter was remanded back to the CIT(E) for fresh examination.
What were the facts?
The assessee applied for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application, observing that the assessee had incurred expenses for religious activities exceeding the prescribed 5% limit.
What were the issues?
Whether the expenses incurred for free distribution of meals qualify as charitable activities for the purpose of Section 80G registration, and if the CIT(E) properly considered the assessee's submissions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “E” BENCHES, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
PER MANISH AGARWAL, A.M.: The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 11.03.2026 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(E)”] u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] pertaining to Assessment Year 2026-27.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee in terms of the application filed on 30.09.2025 in Form 10AB requested for grant of registration u/s 80G of the Act. Ld.CIT(E) observed that the assessee has incurred expenses in FYs 2021-
ITA 5981/DEL/2026 SHREE LAXMI NARAYAN DIVYA DHAM
22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 for religious activities which is more than 5% of the prescribed limit and therefore, rejected the registration u/s 80G of the Act though registration u/s 12AB was granted in terms of the separate order dated 14.02.2026.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking various Grounds of appeal mentioned in the appeal memo.
Since all the Grounds of appeal are with respect to the rejection of the registration u/s 80G of the Act therefore, they are taken together for consideration.
Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the order of rejection, it is observed that though ld. CIT(E) has stated that the assessee has filed reply in response to the show cause notice issued wherein assessee was asked to explain as to why the registration should not be rejected as it has spent more than 5% of its income in religious activities in the last three FYs i.e. in FYs 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24. The claim of the assessee was that CIT(E) has failed to appreciate the nature of expenses which were incurred for free distribution of meal under the head “langar and bhog” expenses and all the details of such expenses including cost of raw material like, cooking fuel and other expenses for preparation of food were claimed and necessary details were also filed. As per ld. AR, the food was distributed free of cost to under-privileged individuals on daily basis without making any discrimination of their cast and creed and therefore, clarified this activity as charitable activity and requested for grant of registration u/s 80G of the Act.
ITA 5981/DEL/2026 SHREE LAXMI NARAYAN DIVYA DHAM
As observed above, ld. CIT(E) has failed to examine all the details filed by the assessee and in summary manner, has rejected the claim by observing that assessee has applied more than 5% of its income for religious purposes. Before us, the assessee has filed copy of reply and other details filed in response to the show cause notice issued by ld. CIT(E) which were not considered before rejection of the application for registration u/s 80G of the Act. Considering the overall facts, we remand the issue back to the file of ld. CIT(E) wit the direction to examine the nature of expenses incurred as claimed by the assessee on the free distribution of food and if the contention of the assessee is found correct, the registration u/s 80G of the Act be granted. With these directions, all the Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16.09.2026. Sd/- Sd/-
(MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Date-16.09.2026 *Amit Kumar, Sr. P.S* Copy to: SHREE LAXMI NARAYAN DIVYA DHAM, 1 C/O DR RAVI GUPTA B 41 LGF KAILASH COLONY NEW DELHI 110048 CIT EXEMPTION 2 DELHI-110002 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE TRUE COPY
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., DELHI
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 →- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026