SVAYAMBHU FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION , PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee one more opportunity. The CIT(E) is directed to provide a reasonable hearing opportunity and pass a speaking order.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal is against the order of the CIT(Exemption) denying approval under section 80G(5) of the Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application because the assessee did not provide explanations or details against discrepancies despite sufficient opportunities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) erred in denying approval under section 80G(5) due to non-furnishing of details, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity for adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 26.11.2024 framed by ld.CIT(Exemption), Pune denying grant of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT(E) has rejected the application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act as the assessee did not furnish any explanation and did not filed any details against the discrepancies communicated to it even after being provided sufficient opportunities. Considering the fact that very few opportunities was granted to the assessee and taking into consideration the change in system of giving notices through ITBA portal which sometimes goes unnoticed by the Assessee/Tax Consultant, we in the interest of justice and fair to both the parties deem it proper to to give one more opportunity to the assessee restoring the issue raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(E) for afresh adjudication. Needless to say that ld.CIT(E) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order after considering the submissions of the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide latest email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 05th day of June, 2025.
More judgments on Section 80G(5)
- Nikunj Mahendrabhai Adani, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2026/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- The Divine Life Society, Jaipur vs Exemption Ward 1, JaipurITA 1491/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- The Divine Life Society, Jaipur vs Exemption Ward 1, JaipurITA 1484/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026