SRI AYYAPPA PAKDHARHAL SANGAM,SRIVILLIPUTHUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2837/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 October 2026AY 2025-263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the conflicting claims regarding compliance with notices. Considering the objective of the assessee's society to provide relief to the poor and the fact that it had previously enjoyed registration, the Tribunal was of the view that proper opportunity should have been given before rejection. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have provided a proper opportunity to the assessee-society before rejecting its application. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to place all relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E) for examination of its objectives and genuineness of activities. The impugned orders were set aside, and the applications were restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). The assessee was advised to file a physical copy of the application under the correct provision, and the Ld. CIT(E) was directed to consider it after affording a proper opportunity and then decide the applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G in accordance with law. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Ayyappa Pakdharhal Sangam, filed appeals against two orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (CIT(E)), Chennai. The first order, dated 16.03.2026, denied registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the second order, dated 18.03.2026, denied approval under Section 80G of the Act, for Assessment Year 2025-26. The CIT(E) passed ex parte orders as the assessee did not respond to notices. The assessee, however, claimed to have filed all required documents and contended that the rejection was against natural justice. The Sangam was registered under the Indian Societies Act on 02.03.2011 with the objective of providing relief to the poor, including Annadanam. It previously held registration under Section 12A and provisional registration under Section 80G(5).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without affording a proper opportunity to be heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the assessee's application for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without affording a proper opportunity to be heard? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee contended that it had filed all documents called for by the Ld. CIT(E) and that the rejection was made without giving an opportunity to respond, violating natural justice. The assessee also claimed to have responded to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through the Ld. CIT(E), rejected the applications for non-response to notices and alleged non-filing of relevant documents and incorrect filing under relevant sub-clauses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & MS. PADMAVATHY. S

Hearing: 25.08.2026Pronounced: 12.10.2026

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee-Sangam against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(E)’), Chennai, dated 16.03.2026 denying registration u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); and against the order dated 18.03.2026 denying approval u/s.80G of the Act. 2. No one appeared for the assessee. However, on perusal of the ground of appeal as well as on perusal of the impugned orders reveal that the Ld. CIT(E) has passed ex parte orders qua the assessee. From the

ITA 2836 & 2837 /Chny/2026 (AY 2025-26) Sri Ayyappa Pakdharhal Sangam :: 2 :: documents placed on record, it is revealed that the Ld. CIT(E) while processing the applications filed by the assessee for grant of registration u/s. 12AB and 80G found that the assessee did not respond to his notices and hence, he has rejected the applications filed by the assessee. However, the assessee has contended that it has filed all the documents called for by the Ld. CIT(E). And despite that, the Ld. CIT(E) has alleged non-filing of the relevant documents as well as finding fault with the assessee not filing the application under the relevant sub-clause, that too without giving an opportunity to the assessee to respond, has rejected the application which action is against the principles of natural justice. We note that the assessee-society was registered under the Indian Societies Act dated 02.03.2011 with the objective to provide inter alia relief to the poor [provide regular Annadanam (feeding the poor] at the AyyappanKovil, Srivilliputhur. According to the assessee, it has been enjoying registration under 12A vide order dated 30.11.2022 from AY 2023-24 to 2025-26 as well as having provisional registration u/s.80G(5) till AY 2025-26. The assessee’s application has been rejected inter alia since assessee didn’t respond to Ld. CIT(E)’s notices. Assessee on the other hand claims to have responded to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E).

3.

Be that as it may. In the light of the conflicting claims on the issue of compliance to the notices, and considering the fact that assessee enjoyed registration albeit provisional, we are of the view that justice should not only be done, but should be seem to be done. Hence, considering the objective of the assessee’s society to provide relief to the poor as claimed by it, the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have given proper opportunity to the assessee-society before rejecting its application. Hence, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee, to place all the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E) to facilitate

ITA 2836 & 2837 /Chny/2026 (AY 2025-26) Sri Ayyappa Pakdharhal Sangam :: 3 :: examination of its objectives, the genuineness of its activities etc as envisaged in the Act. Hence, we set aside the impugned order and restore the application back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). The assessee if advised to file physical copy of application under the correct provision and the Ld CIT(E) to consider it after affording proper opportunity to the assessee and thereafter, to decide the application for grant of registration u/s.12AB as well as approval u/s.80G in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on the 12th day of October 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�ावती .एस) (एबी टी. वक�) (PADMAVATHY. S) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 12th October, 2026. YS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF YASHVIR Digitally signed by YASHVIR SINGH SINGH Date: 2026.10.16 10:54:29 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →