MAA BHADRAKALI SHAKTIPEETH,HARYANA vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD AMBALA, HARYANA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.723/CHANDI/2026 & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.724/CHANDI/2026 Maa Bhadrakali Shaktipeeth CIT (Exemptions) Room No. 21, 1st Floor, Chandigarh बनाम/ Vs. Shri Devikoop, Bhadrakali Mandir Jhansa Road Kurukshetra, Haryana – 136118 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAETM-4365-Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. ARs ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Smt. Geetinder Mann (CIT) - Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 02-07-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 15-07-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee are connected appeals. First, we take up ITA No.723/Chandi/2026 which arises out of an order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh, [CIT(E)] on 28-01-2026 granting registration to the assessee-trust u/s 12AB(1)(b) for AYs 2027-28 to 2036-37. The only grievance of the

assessee is that it has been accorded the status of Religious Entity as against the claim of the assessee that it was religious cum charitable trust. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2. From case records and assessee’s paper book, it emerges that the assessee is on old trust and in the new regime of registration, it was granted registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) for AYs 2022-23 to 2026-27 in Form No.10AC on 15.03.2022. The assessee sought renewal of registration and filed relevant application on 27.09.2025 which is placed on Page Nos.33 to 40 of the paper book. In this application, the assessee claimed to have carried out charitable activities only. Though the registration as desired by the assessee was granted, however, it was accorded the status of a religious entity which is the sole grievance of the assessee. The Ld. AR has argued that the activities of the society are primarily charitable in nature which is evident from its financial statements. It has also been stated that no such notice was issued to the assessee before forming an opinion that the assessee was a religious entity. 3. After going through case records, we find substantial force in the argument of Ld. AR. It is quite clear that the issue that the assessee was a religious entity was nowhere been confronted to the assessee which was in violation of the principles of natural justice. When the financial statements were duly furnished by the assessee along with its nature of activities wherein the assessee claimed its status to be a charitable entity, Ld. CIT(E) could not have held the assessee to be

religious entity without confronting specific issues to the assessee. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order for de novo consideration of Ld. CIT(E) in the light of assessee’s financial statements with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In ITA No.724/Chandi/2026, the assessee is aggrieved by denial of approval u/s 80G(5). The approval has been denied merely by observing that the assessee has booked religious expenditure. The Ld. CIT(E) has invoked Explanation-3 to Sec.80G to hold an opinion that charitable purpose do not include a purpose, the whole or substantially the whole of which is religious in nature. However, no factual examination of financial statements has been done and the conclusion is not based on actual facts. The issue has nowhere been confronted to the assessee. No doubt, Explanation-3 provides that charitable purpose do not include a purpose which is wholly or substantially wholly of a religious nature. However, sub-section (5B), which has non-obstante clause, deems an institution to continue to satisfy the requirement of Section 80G(5) wherein religious-nature expenditure in a previous year does not exceed five per cent of trust’s total income for that year. No such exercise has been carried out in the impugned order and no such findings have been brought on record. Under these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and restore this appeal also back to Ld. CIT(E) on similar lines. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

-Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 15-07-2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH