PREMIBEN VALLABHDAS NANDOLA MEDIACAL SAHAYAK TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4714/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 July 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that only one opportunity was provided to the assessee. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration after providing adequate opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) denied these applications. The assessee argued that they were not given sufficient opportunity to respond.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in denying registration and approval without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present their case.

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

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

Pronounced: 14/07/2026

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“Ld. CIT(E)”], dated 01.03.2026 in denying the registration u/s 12AB of the Act and approval under Section 80G of the Act.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) is not justified in rejecting the applications filed by the

ITA 4714 & 4660/MUM/2026 Premiben Vallabhdas Nandola Medical Sahayak Trust

assessee for registration u/s 12AB of the Act and approval 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 dated 07.01.2026 issued to which the assessee could not comply with. Therefore, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for considering the applications of the assessee for registration u/s 12AB/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 the Ld. CIT(E) order suggests that only one opportunity has been provided to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice we restore these appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) shall decide the applications for registration u/s 12AB and 80G of the Act afresh after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

4.

In the result, these two appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14/07/2026 Sd/- Sd/- MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 14/07/2026 Kunal

ITA 4714 & 4660/MUM/2026 Premiben Vallabhdas Nandola Medical Sahayak Trust

Copy to: Premiben Vallabhdas Nandola Mediacal Sahayak Trust 142/2 Asalaya Jain Socity, Sion, Mumbai-400022, Maharashtra 1

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), Room No. 601, 6th Floor, Cumballa Hill MTNL TE Building, Pedder Road, 2 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 →