IITR ALUMNI ASSOCIATION,ROORKEE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 107/DDN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 August 2026AY 2026-276 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the provision regarding the time limit for filing the application under section 80G is directory and not mandatory. The CIT(E) was directed to decide the application afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under section 80G of the Income-tax Act. The CIT(E) refused the registration, citing that the application was barred by limitation as per Section 80(5) of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the time limit for filing an application for registration under Section 80G is mandatory or directory. Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application on grounds of limitation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘DB’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT DR
Hearing: 25.05.2026Pronounced: 17.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘DB’, NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 107/DDN/2026; Assessment Year: 2026-27 IITR Alumni Association, Vs Commissioner of Income 1, Main Building, IIT, Roorkee, (Exemption) Uttarakhand- 247 667 Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABAT0248D Assessee by: Sh. Rajiv Sahni, CA Revenue by : Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 25.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 17.08.2026

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment years 2026-27, arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short, the “CIT(E)”], Lucknow’s order dated 22.12.2025, passed in DIN and order no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1083941811(1), involving proceedings under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

2.

We notice at the outset during the course of hearing that learned CIT(E) order herein has refused registration to the assessee’s application filed on 22.04.2025 by quoting clause (iii) reading with the 1st proviso to section 80(5) of the Act as barred by limitation. He holds in other words that it ought to have filed the same either at least six months prior to expiry

of period of provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities; whichever is earlier.

3.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel quotes [2024] 167 taxmann.com 387 (Delhi-Trib.) Pracheen Shri Aggarwal Digamber Jain Panchayat Delhi holding the aforesaid statutory provision as directory than a mandatory one; as under:

2 | P a g e

3 | P a g e

4 | P a g e

We, accordingly, reject the Revenue’s vehement contentions supporting the learned CIT(E) impugned refusal of section 80G registration to the assessee and direct him to decide the same as per law afresh preferrably within three effective opportunities of hearing. 5 | P a g e

All other remaining issues between the parties are kept open at this stage.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.08.2026 .

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17.08.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

6 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →