ZAVERCHAND MANEKCHAND (STHAPIT) SAURASHTRA KHADAYATA VANIK SAHAYAKA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4728/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 July 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) was not justified in rejecting the application without giving adequate opportunity. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) denied registration without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to respond to the notice.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of registration under Section 80G without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 12AB,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

Pronounced: 17/07/2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“Ld. CIT(E)”], dated 02.03.2023 in denying registration u/s 80G of the Act.

ITA 4728/MUM/2026 Zaverchand Manekchand (Sthapit) Saurashtra Khadayata Vanik Sahayaka Trust 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) is not justified in rejecting the application filed by the assessee for registration u/s 80G of the Act without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to respond and explain before him. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that only one opportunity has been given to the assessee to respond to the notice issued which the assessee could not comply with for some reason. Therefore, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that the appeal may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for considering the application of the assessee for registration u/s 80G of the Act afresh after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

3.

Heard rival submissions and perused the orders of the Ld. CIT(E). Perusal of order of the Ld. CIT(E) we observe that approval u/s 80G(5) was denied on the ground that application filed for registration u/s 12AB was rejected, without giving opportunity to the assessee. We observed that the Tribunal by order dated 14.07.2026 restored the appeal of the assessee in challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act, to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. Thus, in the interest of justice we restore the issue in this appeal also to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) who shall decide the application for approval u/s 80G(5) afresh after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

ITA 4728/MUM/2026 Zaverchand Manekchand (Sthapit) Saurashtra Khadayata Vanik Sahayaka Trust

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 17/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 17/07/2026 Kunal

Copy to: Zaverchand Manekchand (Sthapit) Saurashtra Khadayata Vanik Sahayaka Trust 1 10, Gokul Building, 59, R.B. Mehta Road, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai-400077, Maharashtra

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) Room No. 601, 6th floor, Cumballa Hill MTNL TE Building, Pedder Road, 2 Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026, Maharashtra

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE TRUE COPY

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →