SWAMI ATMA RAM LAKSHYA SANSTHAN,DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2533/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 August 20266 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause due to the ineffective service of notices. The matter was restored to the CIT(Exemption) for de-novo consideration to provide an effective opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee society applied for registration under Section 12AB, but their application was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) for non-compliance with notices. The assessee claimed the notices were sent to an inactive email address and their previous counsel was ineffective.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration application due to non-receipt of notices, sent to an inactive email, constitutes a valid ground for rejection without providing an effective opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Hearing: 14.07.2026Pronounced: 14.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member & Sh. Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan Vs CIT(Exemption), 4752/47, Regar Pura, Karol Bagh, Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAJTS9110Q Assessee by: Sh. Gagan Aggarwal, CA Revenue by: Sh. Saurav Narayan Modi, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 14.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 14.08.2026 ORDER Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member: The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.12.2024 of ld. CIT(Exemptions), Delhi wherein the application filed in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s 12AB(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been rejected and the provisional registration granted vide order dated 06.03.2023 for the period from A.Y. 2023-24 was also cancelled.

2.

The facts in brief are that the appellant is society duly registered vide registration No. S/69244/2010 dated 19.04.2010 and is engaged in charitable activities. The appellant has duly filed an application in form 10AB on 29.06.2024 for grant of regular approval u/s 12AB of the Act.

2 ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan The said application has been rejected vide impugned order by the ld. CIT(E) on the ground that assessee has failed to file details of information required by issuing various notices by the ld. CIT(E).

3.

Aggrieved by the impugned order, the applicant is in appeal before us has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi has erred in passing the impugned order dated 05.12.2024 rejecting the appellant's application in Form No. 10AB for approval of registration u/s 12A, which is arbitrary, illegal, and unsustainable in law. 2. The notices were sent to the inactive email ID of the appellant. No alternative mode of service was attempted. As a result, the notices were never received, making it impossible for the appellant to respond. 3. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned order. The genuineness, completeness, and correctness of the application filed by the appellant trust were never disputed, nor were any adverse findings recorded regarding the charitable nature, genuineness of activities, or misuse of funds. The Learned CIT(E) failed to examine the charitable objects, activities, and overall genuineness of the trust, disposing of the application solely on technical grounds in a mechanical and perfunctory manner, ultimately cancelling the provisional registration without any basis. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or modify any of the above grounds at the time of hearing.” 4. The appeal before the Tribunal is delayed by 375 days and the appellant has sought condonation of delay by moving an application in that regard placed at page 57 to 62 of the paper book and condonation on delay has been sought on the ground

3 ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan that applicant came to know of the rejection order on 09.12.2025 when he has newly appointed counsel for filing ITR for A.Y. 2025-26 and on upon inspection of the proceeding on the income tax portal, the new counsel became aware of the impugned order. It is stated that the delay of 397 days in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate. It is further stated that the service of the impugned order was made only on an inactive e-mail address of the appellant. In his written synopsis, the appellant submitted that the notices were sent on the obsolete e-mail address yogender.chandolia@gmail.com which was originally registered on the income tax portal by the previous counsel during the initial setup. The previous counsel, who was managing the portal credentials, completely omitted to inform the appellant's management about the receipt of these notices for this hearing. It is further submitted that because of the non-working of the previous counsel, the present appeal has been filed by the new counsel after a belated period of about a year which was beyond the control of the assessee. During the hearing, the assessee/appellant submitted that he will file the affidavit of the previous counsel and accordingly the previous counsel Shri Subhash Chandolia has filed his affidavit, the contents of the same are extracted below as under:

4 ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan

5 ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan 5. The ld. DR, on the other hand, would submit that the contents of the application and the affidavit does not make out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay. It is further argued on merit, the appellant has failed to make submissions despite various notices were issued and the impugned order has been passed after due consideration and after giving effective opportunity of hearing and the ld. DR prayed for dismissal of the application.

6.

The ld. AR in support of his arguments has relied upon the recent judgment of the co-ordinate bench of ITAT in ITA Nos. 542 & 543/Rjt/2026 order dated 12.06.2026 wherein similar rejection of Form 10AB application in identical facts was set aside by restoring the matter to the file of CIT(E) for de-novo consideration after giving effective opportunity of hearing.

7.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The contents of the impugned order shows that the applicant failed to comply with the notice dated 08.11.2024 and final opportunity letter dated 21.11.2024, as a result, the application was rejected by the ld. CIT(E). Since, the applicant has submitted that the notices were sent on the wrong/inactive e-mail which could not be received and further that the previous counsel could not pursue the case effectively for the reason explained by him in

6 ITA No. 2533/Del/2026 Swami Atma Ram Lakshya Sansthan affidavit, the factual matrix before us is such including the grounds raised for seeking condonation of delay that the applicant has made out a case which shows the sufficient cause for late filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The delay in filing the appeal is accordingly condoned. Since the impugned order has been passed without giving an effective opportunity of hearing, we deem it expedient in the interest of justice that applicant needs to be given one more effective opportunity of hearing for leading evidence/making submissions in support of his application. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for deciding the application de-novo after giving an effective opportunity of hearing. The assessee/appellant is also directed to make the necessary submissions/ detailed material before the ld. CIT(E) within the period of 60 days of this order.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 14/08/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Raj Kumar Chauhan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 14/08/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →