KHAMGAR DRUK DHARMAKARA COLL OF BUDDHIST CULTURAL & WELFARE CHRT TRUST,KANGRA vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(Exemption) for re-examination. This decision was made by respectfully following a similar decision by the Tribunal on the contours of religion and guidelines for approving such trusts.
What were the facts?
The assessee's application for approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) was rejected by the CIT(Exemption). The rejection was based on the objects of the trust and Explanation 3 to Section 80G, stating that a charitable purpose cannot be substantially religious.
What were the issues?
Whether a charitable purpose can be considered valid for Section 80G approval if it is substantially religious in nature.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, JM
आदेश / O R D E R RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA (Judicial Member) 1. Aggrieved by rejection of an application as filed by the assessee seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) vide impugned order dated 15.10.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh, [CIT(E)], the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. Upon perusal of and impugned order, it could be seen that the approval has been denied by Ld. CIT(E) by quoting the objects of the assessee-trust and by invoking Explanation 3 to Section 80G. It has
finally been held that charitable purpose does not include a purpose the whole or substantially the whole of which is religious in nature. 3. During hearing, it was an admitted position that the similar issue has been decided by Tribunal in bunch of appeals titled as Shri Sanatan Dharam Venkuth Dharamsewa Samiti in ITA Nos.572/Chd/2026 &ors. common order dated 03.08.2026 defining the contours of religion and laying down certain guidelines for approval of such trusts. Respectfully following the same, we restore this appeal back to Ld. CIT(E) for examination on similar lines. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 12th August, 2026
-Sd- -Sd- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 12-08-2026
आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF
BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KENDRIYA SADAN, SECTOR – 9A CHANDIGARH
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 →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026