MDC GLOBAL WELFARE FOUNDATION,CHANDIGARH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 722/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 August 2025Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order, finding that the assessee might be able to substantiate the delay. Applying principles of natural justice, the application was restored to the CIT(E) for de novo consideration, granting the assessee another opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration/approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) was rejected by the CIT(E) because it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The assessee contended that an earlier application (Form 10AB) was filed timely but was rejected due to technical reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee, whose application for Section 80G(5)(iii) registration was rejected as time-barred, should be granted another opportunity to explain the delay and have their application considered afresh.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by rejection of an application seeking registration / approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act vide impugned order dated 11-04- 2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh, [CIT(E))], the assessee is in further appeal before us. Upon perusal of para-9 of the impugned order, it could be seen that the application has been filed on 22-11-2024 which is not within the prescribed time limit as extended by Board from time to time. The assessee commenced its activities during FY 2021-22. Therefore, the application was held to be non-maintainable with a liberty to the assessee to file fresh application. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. AR has stated that the assessee filed Form No.10AB within the permitted time on 30-03-2024 which was rejected on technical reasons and the same would be a reasonable cause for alleged delay. The Ld. AR has sought another opportunity of hearing before registration authority which has been opposed by Ld. CIT-DR.

3.

From the arguments of Ld. AR, it would appear that the assessee could be in a position to substantiate the delay in filing of form to a certain extent. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee before registration authority to plead and prove its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the registration application stand restored back to Ld. CIT(E) for de novo consideration after providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 04-08-2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 04-08-2025. आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(iii)

All 687 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →