JOGESHWARI KELWANI MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5079/MUM/2026Status: HeardITAT Mumbai17 July 20268 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that assessees should be given an effective and reasonable opportunity to furnish documents and explanations before rejection of their applications. Since this was not adequately provided, the matters were restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessees' applications for registration under section 12AB and/or approval under section 80G were rejected by the CIT(E). The assessees argued that they were not given an effective opportunity to respond to a single show-cause notice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) provided an effective and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessees before rejecting their applications for registration/approval.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT

For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, D/R

आदेश / ORDER PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

In these appeals, the respective assessees have challenged the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E) whereby the applications seeking registration under section 12AB and/or approval under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the case may be, have been rejected.

2.

Since common issues are involved in all the captioned appeals and identical grounds have been raised by the respective assessees, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

Before us, the Ld. ARs appearing on behalf of the respective assessees submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the applications after issuing only one show-cause notice and without affording an effective and meaningful opportunity of being heard. It was submitted that the assessees could not adequately respond to the said notice, resulting in the impugned orders being passed. The Ld. ARs, therefore, prayed that the matters may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. DR fairly left the issue to the discretion of the Bench.

ITA 5080 & 5186/MUM/2026 ITA 5063 & 5064/MUM/2026 ITA 5079 & 5147/MUM/2026 ITA 4846 & 4847/MUM/2026 ITA 4757 & 4758/MUM/2026 ITA 5150 & 5145/MUM/2026 ITA 4874 & 4875/MUM/2026 ITA 4845/MUM/2026 We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of the material available on record.

4.

We find that the applications have been rejected after issuance of only one show-cause notice. In our considered opinion, before rejecting an application seeking registration under section 12AB and/or approval under section 80G of the Act, the assessee should be afforded an effective and reasonable opportunity to furnish the requisite documents, explanations and other evidences in support of its claim. Since such opportunity was not effectively available in the present cases, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of substantial justice, to restore the matters to the file of the Ld. CIT(E).

4.1. Accordingly, we set aside the respective impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matters to his file with a direction to adjudicate the applications of the respective assessees afresh in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of being heard. The assessees shall extend full cooperation in the proceedings and furnish all such documents and information as may be required by the Ld. CIT(E). We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the applications and all the issues are left open to be decided by the Ld. CIT(E) in accordance with law.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

ITA 5080 & 5186/MUM/2026 ITA 5063 & 5064/MUM/2026 ITA 5079 & 5147/MUM/2026 ITA 4846 & 4847/MUM/2026 ITA 4757 & 4758/MUM/2026 ITA 5150 & 5145/MUM/2026 ITA 4874 & 4875/MUM/2026 ITA 4845/MUM/2026 Sd/- Sd/-

GIRISH AGRAWAL BEENA PILLAI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai Dated: 17/07/2026 SC. Sr. P.S.

Copy to: CENTRE FOR SOCIAL AND BEHAVIOUR CHANGE COMMUNICATION , TILAK MANDIR 1ST FLOR CONGRESS HOUSE 1 COMPUND ,VP ROAD GRANT ROAD AREA, MUMBAI-400004, MAHARASHTRA

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), 2 CUMBALLA HILL MTNL BUILDING MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA

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

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →