M/S NEXUS OF GOOD FOUNDATION,UTTAR PRADESH vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) , LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4501/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 July 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) due to a sketchy rejection of the delay condonation request and lack of opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The CIT(E) was directed to re-adjudicate the application, considering the cause for delay and hardship.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) was rejected by the CIT(E) for being filed beyond the statutory time limit. The assessee also failed to provide a valid reason for the delay or request condonation.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) was justified without a proper consideration of the delay condonation request and affording natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 80G,Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Pronounced: 29.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िद�ी पीठ�, नई िद�ी INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4500 and 4501/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: -) M/S NEXUS OF GOOD CIT (EXEMPTION) FOUNDATION LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH C-80 SECTOR -50 GAUTAM BUDH Vs. NAGAR, NOIDA-201301, UTTAR PRADESH अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AADTN3771G अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: None ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Sh Rajore Satish Chandra Ramsevak, CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 25.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 29.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH

These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Lucknow, [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(E)] both dated 27.02.2026 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. Both the appeals of the assessee are regarding the common issue of rejection of registration u/s 12A and 80G and hence for the purposes of convenience were heard together and are being adjudicated by this common order.

ITA 4500/DEL/2026 M/S NEXUS OF GOOD FOUNDATION

ITA No.4500/Del/2026

3.

The assessee was called absent.

4.

The ld. DR took us through the brief factual matrix of the case. It was submitted that in the present case, the request for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) were rejected for having been filed beyond the statutory time limit for filing of application. The ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of ld. CIT(E).

5.

We have noted that while rejecting the request for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii), the ld. CIT(E) has observed as under:-

“The registration u/s 12AB(1)(b) dated 23.08.2024 granted by the CIT(E) of the assessee society has expired on 31.03.2025 (A.Y.2025- 26) Assessee had to apply for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the I.T. Act 1961, upto 30.09.2024(i.e., at least six months prior to expiry of the period of provisional registration). However, it has applied for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)i on 25.09.2025, which is not within the statutory time limit for filing application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the I.T. Act 1961. As noted, the assessee has also not made any request for condonation of delay with a valid reason. In view of the facts discussed above, I am left with no other option but to reject assessee's application seeking Registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) vide form 10AB filed on 25.09.2025.” 6. A perusal of the above alludes that the request for condonation of delay, which lay at the root of the matter, has been summarily rejected in a sketchy and cryptic manner. It is also alluded that the appellant was not afforded reasonable opportunity of being heard before rejection of its application. Natural Justice demands that due opportunity of being heard be given to all the litigants. Be that as it may be, in the interest of justice, we set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and direct him to re-adjudicate de novo the assessee’s application under section 12A. While considering the appellants application, the ld. CIT(E) shall also consider the issue of justified cause for the delay Page 2 of 3

ITA 4500/DEL/2026 M/S NEXUS OF GOOD FOUNDATION

and the element of genuine hardship being cause to the assessee. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices issued by the ld. CIT(E) and any non-compliance shall be adversely viewed. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.4501/Del/2026 7. The above appeal relates to the denial of registration u/s 80G. The ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application on the premise that the request for registration u/s 12A(supra) stands rejected. Considering the decision in ITA No.4500/Del/2026 (supra), applying the principle of mutatis mutandis, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.4501/Del/2026 is also allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29th July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 29.07.2026 Shekhar

More judgments on Section 12A

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →