INVESTCARE EDU FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), DELHI, DELHI

Brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed an application dated 18.06.2025 in Form No.10AB for registration u/s 12A (1)(ac)(iii) of the 1961 Act , as well an separate application dated 18.06.2025 in Form No. 10AB for grant of approval u/s.

Aggrieved, the assessee has filed two separate appeals before the Tribunal i.e. separate appeals wrt rejection of both the aforesaid applications. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that ld. CIT(E) did not give proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee . It was submitted that the ld. CIT(E) committed mistake in understanding the entire matter , and there are perversity in the order of ld. CIT(E). The ld. Counsel for the assessee has now filed before ITAT written synopsis rebutting the allegations of ld. CIT(E) point by point. Paper book has been filed by the assessee before ITAT containing 405 pages. The same are placed on record in file. Copies of written synopsis as well paper book were also furnished by the assessee to the ld. CIT-DR. It was prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee, and the assessee will rebut all the allegations of department with cogent documents/evidences to substantiate its stand.

We have considered rival contentions and perused the materials available on record, which are culled out in preceding para’s of this order and are not repeated again. The assessee has filed two separate application with ld. CIT(E) for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) dated 18.06.2025 , and secondly application dated 18.06.2025 for approval u/s 80G. The ld. CIT(E) issued separate notices along with questionnaire(s) seeking details from the assessee with respect to its two aforesaid applications . The assessee filed part reply/response to the said notices before ld. CIT(E). Thereafter, to further notices, the assessee again filed part replies before ld. CIT(E). The assessee did not responded to the final notice issued by ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) dismissed both the aforesaid applications vide separate orders both dated 09.12.2025 . There were five allegations made by ld. CIT(E) while dismissing the applications of the assessee. The said allegations are recorded in the orders of rejection. The assessee has now filed point by point rebuttal of all the allegations levied by ld. CIT(E) . The assessee has filed paper book containing 405 pages along with written synopsis to rebut allegation of the Revenue. The copies were handed over to ld. CIT-DR. These documents/evidences/contentions as now made by the assessee need verification and enquiry on merits. Keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and fairness to both parties, we are of the considered view that end of the justice will be met to send back the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for denovo determination of both the applications of the assessee firstly application dated 18.06.2025 filed for seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and secondly application dated 18.06.2025 filed by the assessee for seeking approval u/s 80G of the 1961 Act. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits of the issues in both the appeal(s), and the ld. CIT(E) shall pass orders on merits in accordance with law unhindered by any of our

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Orders were pronounced in the Open Court 29.06.2026 on the conclusion of the hearing in the presence of both the parties Sd/- Sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:30.06.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI