RAVINDRANATH MEDICAL FOUNDATION,HYDERABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

ITA 968/HYD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 September 2026AY 2026-278 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) rejected the applications without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the orders of the CIT(E) were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable foundation, applied for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected both applications, citing non-compliance with notices and lack of valid registration under Section 12AB for the 80G approval.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications for registration and approval without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee.

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, Hyderabad “A” Bench, Hyderabad

For Respondent: DR Ms. Seema Meena

PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : The above two appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders dated 12.01.2026 and 06.03.2026 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, rejecting the applications filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB seeking registration under Section 12AB and app

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →