NORTH ZONE CHAPTER OF THE UROLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA,UROLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA,SOUTH PATEL NAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE, MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

PER RAMIT KOCHAR, AM:

These two appeals are filed by the assessee against two separate order(s) of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi [CIT(E), in short) both dated 11.11.2025( DIN & Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1082504495(1) and ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1082504526(1)) rejecting both the applications filed by the assessee firstly for seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(c)(iii) and secondly for approval u/s 80G respectively of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” in short).

2 ITA Nos.198 & 199/Del/2026 North Zone Chapter of the Urological Society of India v. CIT(E)

separate application dated 24.06.2025 in Form No. 10AB for grant of approval u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the 1961 Act, before learned CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) issued questionnaire’s dated 10.07.2025 to the assessee with the request to furnishing certain details ,document and/or clarification in support of the claim of the registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act , and secondly for grant of approval u/s 80G. The assessee did not file replies wrt questionnaire issued by ld. CIT(E).The ld. CIT(E) granted two more opportunities to the assesse wrt both the aforesaid applications, but there was no response from the assessee. The ld. CIT(E) dismissed both the aforesaid applications vide separate orders both dated 11.11.2025. Thus, the ld. CIT(E) vide two separate orders firstly order passed in Form No. 10AD u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) dated 11.11.2025 rejected the application of the assessee for seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the 1961 Act , and secondly vide order passed in Form No. 10AD u/s 80G(5)(ii)(b)(B) rejected the application of the assessee for seeking approval u/s 80G of the 1961 Act, on the grounds that where the activities of the institution have already commenced before seeking approval, it is important for the competent authority to satisfy about genuineness of actual activities undertaken by the assessee vis-à-vis intended activities mentioned in its objects, for which the assessee is required to submit list of donors, bills/vouchers for expenses claimed , sources of funds received , list of beneficiaries etc. Since the assessee has not submitted any replies/details in response to questionnaire issued by ld. CIT(E), the ld. CIT(E) observed that genuineness of the activities of the assessee could not be ascertained, which led ld. CIT(E) to reject both the aforesaid applications. Further, the ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee has filed an application for registration u/s 12A(1)(AC)(iii) instead of 12A(1)(AC)(ii) of the 1961 Act.

3 ITA Nos.198 & 199/Del/2026 North Zone Chapter of the Urological Society of India v. CIT(E)

CIT(E) to an email Id (akvco@yahoo.com) which does not belong to the assessee, and the assessee never received any notices from ld. CIT(E). It was submitted that correct email ID of the assessee is vijaybora@gmail.com which was on record with department, but ld. CIT(E) never sent notices to this email ID. The assessee has enclosed copies of downloaded notices and also profile from IT department data base from webportal , to justify that the notices were sent to wrong email id(copy placed on record). Thus, it is submitted that notices were never served to the assessee, great prejudice is caused to the assessee by rejections of its both the aforesaid applications. It was submitted that the assessee has made application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) i.e. under the correct clause , while ld. CIT(E) erred in invoking clause 12A(1)(ac(ii). Prayers were made to set aside the matter back to file of ld. CIT(E) for denovo determination of the aforesaid both the applications on merits in accordance with law , after providing opportunity to the assessee.

3.2 The ld. CIT-DR fairly submitted that the matter can be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) for denovo determination of the assessee’s both the aforesaid applications.

4 ITA Nos.198 & 199/Del/2026 North Zone Chapter of the Urological Society of India v. CIT(E)

clearly breached. 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 24.06.2025 filed for seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and secondly application dated 24.06.2025 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, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the set aside remand proceedings to be conducted by the ld. CIT(E), otherwise the ld.CIT(E) shall be free to pass orders in accordance with law on merits. All the contentions are kept open. The orders of the ld. CIT(E) , both dated 11.11.2025 are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for denovo determination of the aforesaid applications on merits in accordance with law after giving opportunity to the assessee. Evidences/ contentions filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(E) shall be admitted by the ld. CIT(E) and shall be decided on merits in accordance with law. Both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. We order accordingly.

Sd/- Sd/- (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:03.06.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT

5 ITA Nos.198 & 199/Del/2026 North Zone Chapter of the Urological Society of India v. CIT(E)