SHIVANI FOUNDATION,DEFENCE COLONY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4114/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 June 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without proper consideration. It directed the CIT(E) to grant the assessee another opportunity to be heard on merit.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shivani Foundation, appealed against the CIT(E)'s order rejecting its application for registration under section 80G. The assessee claimed that all requisite documents and replies were furnished, contrary to the CIT(E)'s observation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the 80G registration application without providing a proper opportunity to be heard and considering all submitted documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Shri Yashvendra Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 23.06.2026Pronounced: 23.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4114/Del/2026 Shivani Foundation Vs. CIT (Exemption), C-112, Civic Centre, Defence Colony, Minto Road, New Delhi-110024 New Delhi New Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAXTS4318J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Yashvendra Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.06.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 15.03.2026 under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(E)”].

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 4114/Del/2026 Shivani Foundation

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We are proceeding to decide the appeal with the help of ld. DR of the Revenue.

3.

Heard ld. DR of the Revenue and perused the material on record. We observed that the ld. CIT (E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration u/s 80G of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) erred in holding that the appellant failed to submit documents and replies whereas all requisite documents and detailed responses were furnished. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (E) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld. CIT (E) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.06.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to:

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 4114/Del/2026 Shivani Foundation

1.

Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →