SBHSS FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2869/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 July 2026AY 2025-262 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) rejected the applications due to non-furnishing of complete documents, preventing verification of the activities. Therefore, the matters were remitted back to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G. The CIT(Exemption) rejected both applications for not furnishing complete documents and details sought by the department.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of applications for registration and approval was justified due to incomplete documentation, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to furnish the required details.

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 BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: CA & Sh. Anmol Jha, Adv
Hearing: 16.07.2026Pronounced: 16.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 2869 & 2870/Del/2026 A.YR. : ___ SBHSS FOUNDATION, VS. COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX SHREE KRISHNA SANSTHAN, (EXEMPTION), DELHI PARAGYA MARG, NEW DELHI – 110 002 D-BLOCK, SAKET, NEW DELHI – 110 017 (PAN: AAMTS6616G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Appellant by : Sh. V.K. Bindal, CA & Sh. Anmol Jha, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Lal Ram Sanga Salio, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 16.07.2026 Date of pronouncement :16.07.2026 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP : These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders both dated 10.3.2026 of the Ld. CIT(Exemption), Delhi passed u/s. 80G and u/s. 12AB(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively. 2. Ld. AR has submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has erred in law and facts by passing the order rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) for not furnishing the complete documents/details sought, as a result thereof, the necessary verification in support of genuineness of the activities, charitable objects, commencement of the activities could not be completed. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(E) while rejecting the approval u/s. 80G of the Act also, noted that since complete documents/details sought vide notice were also not attached with Form No. 10AB, therefore, the necessary verification in support of genuineness of the activities, charitable objects, commencement of the activities could not be completed. Therefore, it was requested to remit back the issues in both the appeals to the file of the CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to produce the requisite documents before the Ld. CIT(E) in order to canvass its case. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition.

3.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is undisputed fact that Ld. CIT(E) passed both the orders rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and rejecting the approval u/s. 80G for not furnishing the complete documents/details sought vide notices, as a result thereof, the necessary verification in support of genuineness of the activities, charitable objects, commencement of the activities could not be completed. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we deem it fit and proper to remit back the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh, after making necessary verification, if any, and afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in order to furnish the requisite documents/evidences before him so as to substantiate its case adequately and then decide the issues, in accordance with law. However, Assessee is directed through the Ld. AR to furnish the complete details/ evidences before the Ld. CIT(E) in accordance with law and fully cooperate with him during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly. 4. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid manner. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16.7.2026. Sd/- Sd/-

(MANISH AGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

Date: 17-7-2026 SRBHATNAGAR

More judgments on Section 12A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →