KRISHI ANUSANDHAN & KISAN VIKAS FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. CIT(E), DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh consideration. The assessee was given an opportunity to furnish the requisite details and the CIT(Exemption) was directed to decide the applications on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G. The CIT(Exemption) rejected these applications, stating that the assessee did not furnish complete replies to specific queries and submitted general information.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(Exemption) was justified in rejecting the applications for registration and approval due to incomplete replies from the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. Renu Jauhri
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad, Judicial Member & Sh. Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member ITA No. 6948/Del/2025 ITA No. 6949/Del/2025 Krishi Anusandhan & Kisan Vikas Vs CIT(Exemption), Foundation, A-88, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi-110002 Phase-1, Delhi-110052 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAECK1737F Assessee by : Sh. Sikhar Garg, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Amit Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 13.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 29.04.2026 ORDER Per Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member: The above captioned appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 26.09.2025, passed by CIT(Exemption), Delhi, u/s 80G and 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
The assessees has raised following grounds of appeal:
ITA No. 6948/Del/2025 “1. Ld. CIT (Exemption) Delhi is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in rejecting application u/s 80G(5) (ii)(b)(B). 2. Ld. CIT (Exemption) is erred in law and fact and circumstances of the case in holding that applicant has not furnished complete reply of specific query and reply so submitted is general kind.
2 ITA No. 6948/Del/2025 Krishi Anusandhan & Kisan Vikas Foundation 3. Assessee Trust is engaged in business of research and providing information and advise to the agriculturist community since long back. Research documents were also furnished before CIT (Exemption). ITA No. 6949/Del/2025 1. Ld. CIT (Exemption) Delhi is not justified in law and facts and circumstances of the case in rejecting application u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B). 2. Ld. CIT (Exemption) is erred in law and fact and circumstances of the case in holding that applicant has not furnished complete reply of specific query and reply so submitted is general kind. 3. Assessee Trust is engaged in business of research and providing information and advise to the agriculturist community since long back. Research documents were also furnished before CIT (Exemption).”
Since common facts are involved, both these appeals are being disposed off vide a common order and ITA No. 6949/Del/2025 is taken as the lead case.
3.1 The assessee filed application for registration u/s 12A on 27.02.2025 in Form 10AB. Ld. CIT(E) called for various details vide notice served on 24.02.2025. Part compliances were made by the assessee. Thereafter ld. CIT(E) passed the order rejecting the assessee’s application on 26.098.2025.
3.2 Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Before us, ld. AR has requested for remanding the matter back to ld. CIT(E) for giving opportunity to the assessee to furnish requisite details.
3 ITA No. 6948/Del/2025 Krishi Anusandhan & Kisan Vikas Foundation 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Ld. DR has also not objected to the request for remand back made by ld. AR. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter to ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration and decision on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Since, facts and circumstances are similar, ITA No. 6948/Del/2025 pertaining to rejection of approval u/s 80G is also being restored to ld. CIT(E) for fresh decision on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/04/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Challa Nagendra Prasad) (Renu Jauhri) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 29/04/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
More judgments on Section 80G
- Savan Dayalal Ladani, Rajkot vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1)…ITA 575/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Pareshbhai Savjibhai Khunt, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward - 2(2)(3), RajkotITA 842/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ramshrayashil Constructions PVT.LTD vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of INDIAJharkhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Kiea Corporate Business Solutions vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Vrajman Enterprises vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 2 Nov 2026
- Nimmakayala Padmavathi vs. The Union Of INDIAAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Som Nath Nagar Mal Th Partner Sanjay Mahajan vs. Union Of INDIA Th Department Of Financial Services, Ministry Of Finance And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 2 Nov 2026