BASE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT rejected the application on the same day the assessee submitted information and without providing an adequate opportunity for hearing. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT's order.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust applied for recognition under Section 80G. The CIT (Exemptions) requested details, which the assessee provided. However, the CIT rejected the application without providing a further opportunity for clarification.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT (Exemptions) erred in rejecting the Section 80G recognition application without providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard and submit clarifications.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “ C ” BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI A.K. GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
O R D E R
PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM :
The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Bangalore, Rejecting the Recognition under Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee trust has made an application for recognition under Section 80G of the Act on 16.11.2018. Subsequently, the office of the CIT (Exemptions) has sent a letter dt.12.04.2019, calling for provisional financial statements, note on activities, bank statements, and other details etc. The assessee has submitted the details on 27.05.2019. But the CIT (Exemptions) has rejected the application and passed the order. Aggrieved by the order of CIT (Exemptions), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
At the time of hearing, the Ld AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has made an application on 16.11.2018 and also complied with the letter issued by the CIT (Exemptions) office in respect of furnishing of details on 27.05.2019, and further no opportunity was provided to the assessee, before rejecting the application for recognition under Section 80G of the Act. Further the ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity to substantiate the case with evidences before the CIT (E). Contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of CIT (E) and filed written submissions.
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie, the assessee has made an application for recognition under Section 80G of the Act. The CIT (Exemptions) office has sent a letter on 12.04.2019 to submit the details and the assessee has complied with the requirements on 27.05.2019 and is not disputed. The CIT (Exemptions) has considered the submissions of the assessee and rejected the application. We found that the assessee has filed application for recognition on 16.11.2018 and further CIT(E) office has sent a letter calling for information on 12.04.2019 after a period of more than 4 months and the CIT (Exemptions) has rejected the application on 27-05-2019, being the date of submission of information by the assessee and also no opportunity was provided to the assessee to submit clarifications. Therefore Considering the facts, circumstances and in the interest of justice, we provide one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences before the CIT (Exemptions). Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT (E) and restore the disputed issue to the file of CIT (E) to consider afresh and pass a speaking order. Further the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall co-operate in submitting the information for early disposal of the case and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.
In the result, the assessee appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
More judgments on Section 80G
- Savan Dayalal Ladani, Rajkot vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1)…ITA 575/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Pareshbhai Savjibhai Khunt, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward - 2(2)(3), RajkotITA 842/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026