VAIDIK LOK KALYAN TRUST,SONIPAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5584/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 February 2026AY 2025-26Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Naveen Chandra (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not appear and the matter proceeded ex-parte. Considering the possibility of communication gaps, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(E) for a fresh adjudication. The assessee is given three opportunities to plead and prove its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2025-26 arises against an order of the CIT(Exemptions) rejecting its section 12A registration application. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the case proceeded ex-parte. The CIT(E) also proceeded ex-parte in its detailed discussion.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) rightly rejected the section 12A registration application without affording proper opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandra

For Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 17.02.2026Pronounced: 17.02.2026

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2025-26 arises against the CIT(Exemptions), Chandigarh’s DIN & order No. ITBA / EXM / F / EXM45 / 2025-26 / 10788363370(1) dated 10.07.2025, in proceedings u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(E)’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby rejecting it’s section 12A registration application.

Vaidik Lok Kalyan Trust 4. Ms. Monika Singh vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(E)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(E) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel could not be altogether ruled out.

6.

Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(E) for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at it’s own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

All 150 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →