MAXIM FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 699/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 April 2026AY 2025-263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(E), directing that a final opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate its claim. The CIT(E) was instructed to decide the issue afresh based on facts and law.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G was rejected by the CIT(E) for non-maintainability. The assessee had sought an adjournment and provided partial details, but the CIT(E) proceeded with the rejection.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration and approval on technical grounds without a proper hearing, and whether the order was reasoned.

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, DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI

Before: SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, & SH. MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 29/04/2026Pronounced: 29/04/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI

BEFORE SH. SUDHIR KUMAR JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SH. MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.699/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2025-26 Maxim Foundation Vs. CIT (Exemptions) H. No. FF AALI VILLAGE NEW DELHI SARITA VIHAR HARIJAN, New Delhi-110076 PAN No.AAMAM0274B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Date of hearing: 29/04/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 29/04/2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”] vide order dated 22.11.2025. 2. The assessee has raised the following ground in appeal as under:

1.

The Ld. CIT Exemption erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the learned exemption erred in holding that the application filed in Form 10 AB was not maintainable under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii). 3. That the Ld. CIT Exemption failed to apricate that registration under section 12AB cannot be denied on technical or procedural grounds without examining the charitable objects and genuineness of activities. 4. That the rejection of the application is arbitrary and bad in law as adequate and effective opportunity of being heard was not granted. 5. That the learned exemption erred in not passing a speaking and reasoned order as required under law. 6. That the learned exemption erred in rejecting the application for approval under section 80G (5) merely on consequential basis without independent examination. 7. That the impugned orders are contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the principals of natural justice. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.

3.

The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration under section 12AB of the applicant for registration holding that the application as non-maintainable. 4. The Ld. DR has submitted that the Ld. AR has failed to provide the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT (E), the application was rightly rejected. None is present for assessee. 5. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The assessee has filed the part details before the Ld. CIT(E) regarding the trust and also sought

adjournment but the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the registration application as well as the exemption application under 80G of the Act. Since in the instant case the Ld. CIT(E) has dismissed the appeal in non-compliance therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate , its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(E) and co-operate in the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SR BHATNAGGR Date: 30.04.2026 SR BHATNAGGR Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) ` 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →