VIVEKANAND BAL KALYAN SHIKSHA SAMITI,REWARI vs. ITO,WARD EXEMPTIONS, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2616/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 June 2026AY 2026-272 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order passed by the learned CIT(Exemptions) was ex-parte and non-speaking. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration. The CIT(Exemptions) was directed to decide the matter afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter, pass a speaking order in accordance with the law. The principle established is that orders rejecting registration applications must be speaking orders and passed after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Vivekanand Bal Kalyan Shiksha Samiti, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench-E, against an order dated March 6, 2026, passed by the learned CIT(Exemptions), Chandigarh. The order rejected the assessee's application in Form 10AB for registration under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was initially listed for hearing an application for early hearing. However, during the proceedings, it was revealed that the CIT(Exemptions) had passed an ex-parte and non-speaking order. Both parties agreed to have the appeal heard on merits on the same day. The assessment year in dispute is 2026-27.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the learned CIT(Exemptions) rejecting the assessee's application for registration under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is valid, given that it was passed ex-parte and was non-speaking? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the order of the CIT(Exemptions) was ex-parte and non-speaking, which is not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the requirements of law. The assessee sought a fresh consideration of its application. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not record any specific contention in the judgment regarding the validity of the order. However, by agreeing to a fresh hearing, it implicitly accepted the need for a proper adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI FRIDAY BENCH-E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2616/Del/2026 Assessment Year 2026-27 M/s Vivekanand Bal Kalyan Shiksha Samiti, Clo CA Kesri Nandan Agarwal, 3029/18, Rambass, AMSKY & Co., Bharawas Gate, Near Saini Chopal, Rewari, Haryana 123 023. PAN AAATV7641L. (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Exemptions, Rohtak (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by Shri M.R: Sahu, CA. Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Senior DR. Date of hearing Date of pronouncement 05.06.2026 05.06.2026 ORDER Per Mahavir Singh;_Vice President:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(Exemptions) , Chandigarh dated 6th March, 2026 whereby the application of the assessee in Form 1OAB under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for grant of registration was rejected: 2 Originally , the application of the assessee for grant of early hearing of the appeal was fixed today. However, during the course of hearing of the application, it transpired that the learned CIT(Exemptions) has passed an ex-parte and non-speaking order. Both the parties have stated their no objection to the hearing of the appeal on merits today itself: 2 ITA No.2616/Del/2026 3 n the above circumstances, after hearing the arguments of both the sides and perusal of record, we are of the view that it would be in the interest of justice to restore the matter to learned CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration: Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of learned CIT(Exemptions) with a direction to decide the matter afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter, pass a speaking order in accordance with law. 4 In the result; the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Decision pronounced in the open Court on conclusion of hearing on 5th June, 2026. (MANISH AGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Date 16.06.2026 VK

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →