BRAHAM SAGAR SANT CHARAN TRUST,KALWAN, RUPNAGAR vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, C.R. BUILDING, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1595/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 August 2026AY 2027-284 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It set aside the orders of the CIT(E) and restored the matters back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust filed appeals against the rejection of its registration under Section 12AB(1)(b) and approval under Section 80G. The appeals were filed with a delay of 48 and 49 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration and approval without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and appreciating its charitable activities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI VIJAY VARMA

For Appellant: Shri Navneet Sehgal, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Jaishree Sharma, CIT DR
Hearing: 17.08.2026Pronounced: 18.08.2026

PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

Both the appeals have been filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Chandigarh [in short ‘the CIT (E)’] dated 17.02.2026 and 16.02.2026 respectively passed for assessment year 2027-28. Both the appeals were heard together

ITA 1595 & 1598/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 2 and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

2.

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the appeals filed by the assessee are barred by limitation by 48 and 49 days respectively for which affidavits explaining the delay have been placed on record. It was submitted that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate and occurred due to unavoidable circumstances. The ld. DR did not seriously object to the condonation of delay. Considering the contents of the affidavit and the totality of facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeals within the prescribed limitation period. Accordingly, the delay of 48 and 49 days respectively in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.

3.

In both these cases, the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the registration u/s 12AB(1)(b) and approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the social activities of the assessee Trust to help poor and has grossly erred in assuming that the assessee Trust is established for the benefit of a particular religious community or caste and without appreciating that the objects and activities of the Trust are charitable. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT (E) has dismissed the appeals of the

ITA 1595 & 1598/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 3 assessee without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard and therefore, the assessee deserves to be given one more opportunity. Therefore, one more opportunity of being heard may kindly be granted.

4.

The ld. DR has opposed the grant of opportunity.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be provided one more opportunity of being heard to present its cases with supporting evidences/submissions. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the ld. CIT(E) in both the appeals are set aside and both the matters are restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to adjudicate the applications afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all requisite documents, evidences, details and other supporting material as may be called for by the ld. CIT(E). Needless to say, the ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to make such inquiries as deemed fit in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

6.

Before parting, we may observe that the assessee shall fully cooperate in the fresh proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary

ITA 1595 & 1598/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 4 adjournments. In case of any failure on the part of the assessee, the ld. CIT(E), shall be at liberty to decide the matters on the basis of material available on record in accordance with law.

7.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 18th August,2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(VIJAY VARMA) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam”

आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 3. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File 5.

Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kendriya Sadan, Sector 9-A, Chandigarh.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →