SHRI BABA BALAKPURI JI DHARMARTH AUSHDHALAYA AND TRUST,ROHTAK vs. ROHTAK, ROHTAK

The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for grant of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act by observing that activities of the applicant are also religious in nature which cannot be considered as charitable purpose as per the provisions of section 80G(5) of the Act. 3. Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the activities of the applicant are for charitable purposes and not established for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste. He also submitted that the incidental or ancillary religious object do not bar the approval of the trust particularly when the trust predominantly in charitable activities. He also submitted that without recording any finding that which activity of the trust was not charitable the application of the applicant was rejected. He further submitted that the Ld. CIT(E ) passed the order in the violation of the principal of natural justice 4. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the CIT(E). 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also perused the aims and objects of the applicant, as reproduced in the Ld. CIT(E)’s order at page no. 4 to 5. We find that the Ld. CIT(E ) has observed in his order that the assessee booked some religious expenses, but not mentioned which expenses was religious expenses. The Ld. CIT(E ) should have seen the object of the trust and after calling the explanation of the expenses should decide the case on merit. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix and considering 2 the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate, its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law, after considering the object and that activities of the trust. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(E) and co-operate in the proceedings. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 22.07.2026.