SHRI GOKUL DHAM VRINDAVAN DHARMARTH ALL INDIA SEWA SAMITI,ROHTAK vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 411/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 August 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to present its case. The matter was remanded back to the CIT (Exemptions) to provide sufficient opportunity for filing documents and proving the genuineness of the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, which was rejected ex-parte by the CIT (Exemptions) without proper appreciation of the objects and activities. The assessee contended that it was not given a proper opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting the application ex-parte without proper appreciation of material and without providing an effective opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI VIJAY VARMA

For Appellant: Ms. Shefali Garg, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, Pr. CIT, DR
Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 05.08.2026

PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [in short ‘the CIT (E)’] dated 27.09.2024 passed for the assessment year 2024- 25.

2.

The grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT (E) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application filed u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act ex-parte, without properly appreciating the objects, activities and material available on record. It was further submitted that

ITA-411/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2024-25 2 the ld. CIT (Exemptions) has erred in drawing adverse inference merely on account of alleged non-compliance. It was submitted that the assessee was not given proper and effective opportunity of hearing. It was prayed that the assessee be given one more opportunity of hearing to present its case and the matter be restored for fresh consideration on merits.

3.

On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the order passed.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that one more opportunity is required to be given to the assessee to prove its case, and accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT (E) with direction to provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee to file the documents/evidences as may be required to prove the genuineness of the case.

5.

In the light of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 05.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(VIJAY VARMA) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam”

ITA-411/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2024-25 3

आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :

अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 3. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File 5.

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(iii)

All 687 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →