ANANDI DEVI BHAWARLAL FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. CIT(E), CHENNAI

ITA 3556/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 September 20263 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing Form 10AB, considering the affidavit and application filed by the assessee. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) to grant approval to the assessee with effect from September 30, 2025, which was the date the application was filed. The grounds raised by the assessee were considered partly allowed. The Tribunal did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Anandi Devi Bhawarlal Foundation, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai. The assessee had applied for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in Form 10AB on September 30, 2025. The assessee had previously obtained provisional approval under Section 80G from CPC on December 6, 2022, valid until Assessment Year 2025-26 (relevant previous year 2024-25). According to the rules, the application for regular approval in Form 10AB should have been filed at least six months prior to the expiry of the provisional approval, i.e., by September 2024. The Commissioner rejected the application due to the delay, and this rejection was not condoned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) erred in rejecting the application filed in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for approval under Section 80G(5)? (Mixed law and fact) 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) erred in not condoning the delay in filing Form 10AB seeking approval under Section 80G? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the Commissioner erred in rejecting the application and in not condoning the delay in filing Form 10AB. They contended that they had sufficient reasonable cause for the delay and that they satisfied all conditions for obtaining approval under Section 80G(5). The assessee sought a direction to the Commissioner to grant approval. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the Revenue. However, the Commissioner's order, which is under challenge, rejected the application due to the delay in filing Form 10AB and did not condone it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: HONOURABLE GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Hearing: 25.08.2026Pronounced: 23.09.2026

PER GAGAN GOYAL, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (E), (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT (E)’), Chennai dated 19.03.2026. GROUDS OF APPEAL

1.

For that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and is opposed to the principle

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →