BAGRI TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4943/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 June 2026AY 2026-273 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order was passed without adequate opportunity. In the interest of justice, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(E) for re-adjudication de novo.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) for non-submission of required documents. The assessee contended that they did not receive adequate opportunity of being heard and notices were not communicated.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of adequate opportunity and proper communication of notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Pronounced: 29.06.2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 4943/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2026-27) BAGRI TRUST CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI 4318/3 ANSARI ROAD, DARYA CIVIC CENTER, MINTO ROAD, Vs. GANJ, NEW DELHI-110002 DELHI-110002 अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAATB6626P

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Gaurav Gupta, AR ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Rajore Satish Chandra Ramsevak, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 24.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 29.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), New Delhi, dated 26.02.2026 passed under section 12AB(I)(b)(ii) for the Assessment Year 2026-27. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that its rights on natural justice have been violated in as much as the impugned order u/s 12AB(I)(b)(ii) dated 26.02.2026 has been passed without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. It was contended that the notice calling for information and details were

ITA 4943/DEL/2026 BAGRI TRUST

not issued/communicated to the appellant. The ld. Counsel assured that full cooperation would be made to the Revenue authorities and that the matter be remitted back to the CIT(E) for re-adjudication. 3. The ld. DR though relying upon the order of lower authorities did not oppose to the proposed move. 4. Heard rival parties in the light of material available on record. 5. The fact of ex-parte order of CIT(E) is evident from the conclusion drawn by him to reject assessee’s application of premise of non-submission of required documents. We are conscious that no litigant gains by non-prosecution of its case. In the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for re- adjudication de novo, in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The assessee shall be bounden to comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance would be adversely viewed. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29th June, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 29.06.2026 Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent

Page 2 of 3

ITA 4943/DEL/2026 BAGRI TRUST

3.

PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi,

Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

All 150 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →