BRAHMASHREE MITTUR PUROHITHA THIMMAYYA BHATTA SAMPRATHISHTANA R,ANOOCHANA NILAYA,IDKIDU vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, MISSION ROAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2123/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 August 2026AY 2025-264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee did submit documents, albeit after the due date, and the CIT(E)'s order was not well-considered. The order of the CIT(E) was set aside for reconsideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for approval under Section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected the application, stating the assessee did not respond to notices and submit necessary documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the 80G approval application without considering documents submitted after the due date.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S. & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.

PER SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(E), Bangalore dated 29/07/2025 in which the approval sought for u/s. 80G has been rejected.

ITA No. 2123/Bang/2025 BRAHMASHREE MITTUR PUROHITHA THIMMAYYA BHATTA SAMPRATHISHTANA R 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered charitable trust and they applied for approval u/s. 80G of the Act on 25/01/2025. Thereafter the Ld.CIT(E) had granted an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld.CIT(E) was of the view that the assessee had not responded to the notices and therefore concluded that the assessee had not submitted the necessary documents to prove the genuineness of the activities of the trust and on that basis, the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the approval sought for by the assessee.

3.

As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

4.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore we heard the Ld.CIT.DR and decided the appeal on merits. The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that since the assessee had not responded within the time granted by the Ld.CIT(E), the Ld.CIT(E) had passed the order by rejecting the application which is in order.

5.

We have heard the arguments of the Ld.CIT.DR and perused the materials available on record.

6.

We have considered the order of the Ld.CIT(E) in which he has specifically pointed out that the assessee had not responded to the notices issued by him and therefore for the non-compliance of the notices, the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the said application. In the said order, the Ld.CIT(E) had relied on the notice dated 03/07/2025 and 17/07/2025. As per the said notice dated 03/07/2025, the assessee has to file the required details on or before 10/07/2025. We have also perused the acknowledgements downloaded from the portal of the department dated 23/07/2025 in which the assessee had furnished several documents through the portal. Even though the due date for submission was on 10/07/2025, the assessee submitted the said details on 23/07/2025, which does not prevent the Ld.CIT(E) to consider the said documents since the order has been passed

ITA No. 2123/Bang/2025 BRAHMASHREE MITTUR PUROHITHA THIMMAYYA BHATTA SAMPRATHISHTANA R on 29/07/2025 i.e. after the date of filing the details. In fact, in the order, the Ld.CIT(E) had observed that the assessee had not responded to the said notices which we found that the same is not correct. Therefore, the order of the Ld.CIT(E) is not a well-considered one and requires reconsideration. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and remit the issue to him for reconsideration based on the documents furnished by the assessee. We also permit the assessee to furnish more documents, if it is necessary, before the Ld.CIT(E).

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 05th August, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- BALAKRISHNAN S SOUNDARARAJAN K. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Bangalore, Dated: 05th August, 2026.

ITA No. 2123/Bang/2025 BRAHMASHREE MITTUR PUROHITHA THIMMAYYA BHATTA SAMPRATHISHTANA R Copy to:

Brahmashree Mittur Purohitha Thimmayya Bhatta Samprathishtana R, 1 01 Anoochana Nilaya, Idkidu Bantwal 574220, Karnataka.

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), 2 Unity building Annexe, Mission Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 560027.

3 The PCIT / CIT, 4 The D.R., ITAT, Bangalore Bench

BY ORDER

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., BANGALORE.

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →