AAPKI APNI PAHCHAN BHARTIYA SHAKTI SANGTHAN,DELHI vs. CIT E, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1274/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matters back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, acknowledging potential communication gaps. The assessee was granted three effective opportunities of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(Exemption) to present its case for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected the applications on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(E) and whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

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: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 21.05.2026Pronounced: 21.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1273 & 1274/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2026-27 Aapki Apni Pahchan Bhartiya Vs. CIT(Exemption), Shakti Sangthan, Delhi C/o- SSAR & Associates, 102-104, 4379/4, Prakash House, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi -110 002 PAN: AAEAA4033E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ashish Jain, CA Department by Sh. Rajesh Chandra, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 21.05.2026 Date of pronouncement 21.05.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1273 & 1274/Del/2026 arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short, the “CIT(E)”], Delhi’s orders, both dated 05.01.2026 having DINs and orders no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1084434676(1) and ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1084434799(1), involving

ITA Nos.1273 & 1274/Del/2026

proceedings under sections 12AB and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the CIT(E); and; therefore, the matters may be restored back to the CIT(E) for his afresh adjudication. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action rejecting the assessee’s section 12A registration and section 80G approval on merits. 3. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant cases back to the CIT(E) for their afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing, at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

2 | P a g e

ITA Nos.1273 & 1274/Del/2026

4.

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1273 & 1274/Del/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 21st May, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 22nd May, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →