Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against orders of the PCIT(E). Two appeals (ITA No. 334 & 335) were withdrawn by the assessee after opting for the VSVS scheme 2024. The third appeal (ITA No. 336) concerned the rejection of the assessee's Section 80G(5)(iii) application by the PCIT(E) based on technicalities without an opportunity of being heard or considering merits.
Held
The Tribunal held that the PCIT(E) erred in rejecting the Section 80G application solely on technical grounds, without providing due opportunity of being heard and considering the merits. Emphasizing that substance prevails over form, the Tribunal set aside the PCIT(E)'s order for ITA No. 336 and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication with a direction to grant the assessee a proper hearing and pass a speaking order.
Key Issues
Whether the PCIT(E) was justified in rejecting the assessee's application for Section 80G registration solely on technical grounds without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard or considering the merits of the case.
Sections Cited
80G, 12A, 12AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH
The below mentioned appeals have been filed by the appellant assessee contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority indicated Column-E, herein below:-
S. Appeal Nos. AYs Appellant CIT(A) Order Details Respondent No. A B C D E F ITA Guru Mariappan - No. 334 / 1 - Shenbagam Chny / 2025 The Foundation, / - Commissioner of No.2, West VPR Cross 2 - Income Tax Road, Chny / 2025 (Exemption), Chokkikulam, Madurai, / DIN & Order No.ITBA / Chennai. Tamil Nadu-625 002. EXM / F / EXM45 / 2024- [PAN: AABTG2556L] 3 Chny / 2025 - 25 / 1071304702(1) dated 17.12.2024.
2.0 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has informed that the assesse in respect of and 335 has opted for VSVS scheme 2024 and hence would like to withdraw its above two appeals. 3.0 In view of the above, the appeals vide and 335 are dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the appellant assessee to request for restoration of the appeals, in the event of its VSVS application not finally accepted by the Revenue. 4.0 As regards ITA No.336 the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has informed that the Ld.PCIT(Exemption) has dismissed its appeal without according due opportunity of being heard and by merely relying upon technicalities. Thus, the assessee has submitted that the rejection of its application u/s 80G(5) (iii) is erroneous. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee requested that the matter may be remitted back to the Ld.PCIT (E ) for readjudication. 5.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of the Ld.PCIT(E ). 6.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted from para 3.2 of the order of Ld.PCIT the following:- “….3.2 The applicant has not furnished the details called for vide SCN dated 06.12.2024. Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, prescribes the list of documents which are mandatorily required to be submitted by the applicant. It is the responsibility of the applicant to furnish each and every details called for. In order to grant approval u/s. 80G of the Act, “Order for Registration u/s. 12AB” is essential and in this context, the applicant has furnished only the “Order for Provisional Registration” u/s.12A obtained on 14.06.2023 in Form 10AC for the period Page - 2 - of 4 from AY-2024-25 to 2026-27. It has failed to furnish the “Order for Registration u/s.12AB” of the Act. Since the applicant failed to furnish the required details(s) as mandated by Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the application filed by the applicant in Form No.10AB on 27.06.2024 cannot be processed as per the provisions of section 80G of the I.T.Act, 1961. Hence, the applicant is not eligible for getting approval u/s. 80G of the Act…..”
7.0 Thus we have noted that there is sufficient force in the argument of the appellant assessee that its application for grant of registration u/s 80G has been rejected without adequate consideration of merits and by merely relying upon technicalities. It is trite law that substance must always prevail over form. Procedural requirements and compliances are only important so long as they are meeting the end objective, but they cannot be given precedence so as to defeat the very purpose of their creation. This hypothesis is all the more relevant in the cases of grant of any beneficial exemptions to a taxpayer. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the issue is remitted back to the Ld.PCIT(E ) for readjudication of the matter. We therefore set aside the impugned order of the Ld.PCIT(E ) and direct him to readjudicate the assessee’s application for grnat of registration u/s 80G after giving due opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. The assessee shall comply with all the notices of the PCIT(E ) and any non-compliance shall be adversely
Page - 3 - of 4 viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised in the is allowed for statistical purposes. 8.0 In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-
ITA Nos Assessment Result Year / Chny / 2025 - Dismissed as withdrawn / Chny / 2025 - Dismissed as withdrawn Allowed for statistical ITA No. 336 / Chny / 2025 - purposes
Order pronounced on 18th , July-2025 at Chennai.