SWAMI RAMA GURMAT MISSION,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD SOLAN, HIMACHAL PRADESH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) should have decided the application based on the material available on record, especially evidence of charitable activities. The matter was therefore remitted back for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii). The CIT(E) issued a show cause notice, to which the assessee did not respond. Consequently, the CIT(E) rejected the application.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application for registration solely on the ground of non-response to a show cause notice, without considering the available documentary evidence of charitable activities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
PER LALIET KUMAR, JM
These are two connected appeals filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Chandigarh [in short ‘the CIT (E)’] dated 26.02.2026
ITA-569 & 570/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 2
passed for assessment year 2027-28 u/s 12A and 80G of the Income
Tax Act, 1961. 2. The contention of the assessee before us is that the assessee
had filed application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act on 25.09.2025. After filing the application for registration, the Revenue
had issued a Show Cause Notice dated 04.02.2026. It is the case of the ld.CIT (E) that the assessee had not responded to the notice dated
2026 despite the fact that same has been delivered at the e-mail address given by the assessee. As the assessee failed to file
the reply, the ld.CIT (E) was left with no other option but to dispose
of the application filed by the assessee.
The ld. AR appearing for the assessee had submitted that the assessee is a duly registered society and is carrying out the charitable activities within the four corners of law and the sufficient
evidences were produced before the ld.CIT (E). However, the ld.CIT
(E) has not considered the same and has rejected the application
merely on account of some venial defect/non-compliance. It was submitted that once documents were available with the ld.CIT (E),
ITA-569 & 570/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 3
which were filed alongwith the application, then it is the duty of the ld.CIT (E) to decide the issue on the basis of the material available
on record. It was submitted that the matter may kindly be remitted
back to the file of ld.CIT (E) for fresh adjudication.
The ld. DR had not objected to the same.
We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused
the material available on record. Admittedly, the order passed by the ld.CIT (E) clearly mentioned that there was failure/non-compliance
on the part of the assessee to comply the notice issued on 04.02.2026
and therefore, the same formed basis of rejecting the application by the ld.CIT (E). In our considered opinion, the ld.CIT (E) is duty bound
to decide the issue based on the material available on the record.
More particularly, the evidences rendering the charitable activities
established by the assessee, other evidences like detail of the expenses incurred by the assessee and other documents which goes
to prove that the assessee was carrying out the charitable activities.
In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the matter
is required to be remitted back to the file of ld.CIT (E) with the ITA-569 & 570/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 4
direction to decide the application afresh. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the file of ld.CIT (E) with a direction to decide the application afresh. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and file all the documents as may be required for adjudication of the matter. Needless to say the assessee shall cooperate and file all the documents as and when called for.
As we have decided the appeal u/s 12A of the Act, the another
appeal arising out of rejection of Section 80G is also remanded back
to the file of ld.CIT (E) for fresh adjudication. The ld.CIT (E) is expected to pass reasonable and speaking order after affording
reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in accordance with law.
In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 19.05.2026. (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam”
ITA-569 & 570/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2027-28 5
आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant
""थ"/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु"/ CIT 3. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च"ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड" फाईल/ Guard File 5.
More judgments on Section 12A
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sanskardham Nandan, Mehsana vs CIT(Exemption), AhmedabadITA 2980/AHD/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026