PRAHARSHITA FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5227/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 January 2026AY 2024-254 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's appeals were proceeded ex-parte as no one appeared on its behalf. However, with the assistance of the Revenue's representative, the Tribunal was informed that the assessee's second application for section 12A registration was rejected for not being in the prescribed format. The Tribunal also observed that the CIT(E)'s orders indicated the assessee's failure to furnish all requisite details. Considering the possibility of communication gaps, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore all three appeals back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(E) is directed to provide three effective opportunities of hearing to the assessee for consequential proceedings. The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Praharshita Foundation, filed three appeals (ITA Nos. 4991, 5226 & 5227/Del/2025) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, for assessment years 2025-26 and 2024-25. These appeals challenged orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)], Delhi. The orders under challenge pertained to the denial of registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the consequential denial of deduction under section 80G. The procedural history indicates that the assessee's initial application for section 12A registration was rejected. Subsequently, a fresh application was filed, which also met the same fate. The CIT(E)'s orders noted the failure of the assessee to furnish all requisite details during the proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) was justified in rejecting the assessee's application for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for assessment years 2025-26 and 2024-25? 2. Whether the learned CIT(Exemption) was justified in denying the deduction under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the assessee for assessment years 2025-26 and 2024-25, consequent to the rejection of section 12A registration? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee's specific contentions are not recorded as none appeared on its behalf. The judgment notes that the assessee's appeals were proceeded ex-parte. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through the learned CIT(DR), clarified that the assessee's second application for section 12A registration was rejected solely on the ground that it was not filed in the prescribed format. The Revenue's representative also pointed out that the assessee failed to provide all requisite details during the course of hearings for both section 12A and section 80G applications.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARAAND

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Rabindra Choudhary, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Amish S. Gupt, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 13.01.2026Pronounced: 13.01.2026

Date of hearing 13.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 13.01.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s three appeals 5226 & 5227/Del/2025 for assessment years 2025-26 and 2024-25, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short, the “CIT(E)”], Delhi’s orders dated 18.06.2025 and 06.09.2024 having DINs and Notice no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025- 26/1077155164(1), ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024- 25/1068425941(1) and ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024- 25/1068426006(1) involving proceedings under section 12AB and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Delays of 270 days in filing the assessee’s appeals & 5227/Del/2025 are condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

It is next noticed with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the assesseee’s instant three appeals 5226 & 5227/Del/2025 are directed against the learned CIT(Exemption)’s as many orders hereinabove declining section 12A registration forming subject matter of adjudication in the former twin cases, and its third appeal is preferred against denial of the consequential section 80G deduction herein.

4.

Learned CIT(DR) clarifies at the outset that after the assessee’s former section 12A registration application got rejected; it chose to file yet another application which has met the same fate

2 | P a g e for the sole reason of non-institution thereof in the prescribed format. This is what leaves thee assessee aggrieved.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective rival pleadings. Suffice to say, it has come on record that the learned CIT(E)’s former 12A as well as 80G orders hold that the assessee failed to file all the requisite details during the course of hearing. We observe in this factual backdrop that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels could not be altogether ruled out. We accordingly deem it appropriate to restore all the assessee’s three appeals back to the CIT(E) for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing, in consequential proceedings.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →