ANUPAM PUBLIC SCHOOL PRABANDH SAMITI,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4081/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 August 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the applications without due consideration of facts and a non-application of mind. It was held that a reasonable opportunity of being heard is a right of every taxpayer.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Anupam Public School, filed applications for registration under Section 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected these applications citing deficit compliance and inadequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied natural justice and a proper opportunity to be heard before the rejection of its applications for registration under Section 12A and 80G.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 80G,Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

Pronounced: 12.08.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िद�ी पीठ�, नई िद�ी INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4080 & 4081/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: NA) ANUPAM PUBLIC SCHOOL INCOME TAX OFFICER PRABANDH SAMITI INCOME TAX OFFICER, NANAK DAIRY ROAD, HODAL, EXMEPTION WARD, NH-4, NIT Vs. FARIDABAD-121001, HARYANA FARIDABAD, HARYANA-121001, अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AACTA2182K

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Ms. Riya Kumar, CA ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Ms. Ritu Sharma, CIT, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 30.07.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 12.08.2026 ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM

These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), New Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(E)] both dated 18.02.2026 passed under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The appeal of the assessee vide ITA No.4080/Del/2026 is regarding the rejection of its request filed under section 80G(5)(ii) of the Act. The appeal of the assessee vide ITA No.4081/Del/2026 is regarding the rejection of its request filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. As both the appeals are of the same assessee concerning common issues of rejection of its application under section 12A and 80G, they were heard together and for the purposes of convenience, adjudicated by this common order.

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that its right to natural justice has been violated in as much as due opportunity of being heard has not been given before rejecting its request for grant of registration u/s 12A and 80G of the Act. It was submitted that only one notice was issued to it by the ld. CIT(E) before rejecting its request for registration on the premise of deficit compliance. It was further argued that the comments of the auditor were general in nature and were not understood in correct perspective. It was further contended that bank statements of the appellant were also not considered. The ld. Counsel accordingly requested that it be provided one last chance to defend its case and, the matter be considered for remission back to the ld. CIT(E). The ld. Counsel assured that full compliance shall be made to the statutory notices issued by the Revenue authorities.

4.

The ld. DR placed reliance upon the orders of the lower authorities. It was also contended that many notices were issued by the ld. CIT(E) to the appellant before drawing her conclusions. The ld. DR however could not place on records, details of such several notices issued.

5.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected applications of the assessee without due consideration of facts on records alluding towards a non-application of mind. We have noted that the ld. CIT(E) has dismissed assessee’s application for grant of registration under section 12A and u/s 80G , inter alia, on account of inadequate-compliance of the assessee. Reasonable opportunity of being heard is right of every tax payer. Be that as it may be in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the impugned orders of the ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter of grant of registration u/s 12A as well as u/s 80G back to ld. CIT(E) for adjudication de novo in accordance with law. Due opportunity of being heard shall be given to the assessee. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, the appeals of the assessee vide ITA No.4080/Del/2026 and vide ITA No. 4481/Del/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

Finally, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12th August, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [VIKAS AWASTHY] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 12.08.2026 Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT Page 3 of 4

4.

CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi,

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →