SAKSHI,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITANo.4283/DEL/2026 ITANo.4284/DEL/2026 Sakshi, vs. CIT (Exemption), B – 67, First Floor, Delhi. South Extension Part I, New Delhi – 110 049 . (PAN: AAATS1792H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Abhay Shastri, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing : 22.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2026 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. The assessee has filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(E)”, for short] dated 24.03.2026 & 11.12.2024. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice that the ld. CIT (E) has rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) with the observation that, “The

2 ITA Nos.4283 & 4284/Del/2026

applicant has not submitted copy of registration 12A and approval u/s 80G issued prior to 01.04.2021. The applicant has not replied for the same.” Ld. AR submitted that the foundational premise of both impugned orders stands demonstrably falsified by the certificates referred to in Para 2 of the written submissions which were always available on the records of the Income Tax Department, Delhi. However, he prayed that this issue may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(E) with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Similarly, the application filed for registration u/s 80G was also rejected in absence of registration u/s 12AB of the Act ex- parte. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and relied on the order of Ld. CIT (E). 4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that ld. CIT (E) rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act with the observation that copy of registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G issued prior to 01.04.2021 was not submitted before him and the assessee has not replied for the same. Further ld. CIT (E) observed that the complete documents/details sought were also not attached with Form No.10AB, therefore, the necessary verification in support of genuineness of the activities, charitable objects, commencement of the activities could not be completed and accordingly, rejected the registration, however, he observed that applicant is at liberty to file application again for registration u/s 12A of the Act along with necessary justification. 5. In our considered view, in the interest of justice, he could have asked the assessee to submit the relevant documents. However, assessee should be

3 ITA Nos.4283 & 4284/Del/2026

given one more opportunity of being heard on merits and to file all the necessary documents if required. 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 file necessary documents and appear before the ld.CIT (E) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. Similarly, the registration u/s 80G was also rejected on the same ground. The assessee is in appeal before us by filing separate appeals vide ITA No.4284/Del/2026. We remit this issue also back to the file of ld. CIT (E) in the interest of justice. Both the issues under consideration may be decided as per law. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 22nd day of May, 2026 after the conclusion of the hearing. Sd/- sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 29.05.2026 TS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI