SOURA BAPTIST CHRISTIAN MANDALI SAMMILANI,GAJAPATI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 390/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 August 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that while the application was filed late, the authority granting registration also has the power to condone delays. Adhering to the principles of natural justice, it is important to provide an opportunity for the assessee to explain the delay before rejecting the application.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order rejecting its claim for registration under Section 80G of the Act. The assessee had applied for regular registration on 05.11.2024, which was after the due date. The assessee contended that no opportunity was given to explain the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to explain the delay in filing the application for registration under Section 80G of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

Hearing: 12/08/2025Pronounced: 12/08/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 17/06/2025 passed in Application No.CIT(EXEMPTION),HYD/2024- 25/12AA/14011 for the assessment year 2025-2026, thereby rejecting the assessee’s claim for registration u/s.80G of the Act. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee had provisions registration for the assessment years 2022-2023 to 2024-2025. It was the submission that the assessee had applied in Form 10AB for regular registration u/s.80G of the Act on 05.11.2024. It was the submission that as the assessee had not filed the application for regular registration at least six months before the expiry of the provisional registration or within six months from the date of commencement of the activities, whichever is earlier. The ld.CIT(E) has rejected the application for registration. It was the submission that no opportunity was granted to the assessee to explain the delay. It was the prayer that the issues may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) so that the assessee could explain the delay.

3.

In reply, ld.CIT-DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(E).

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the assessee has filed regular registration u/s.80G of the Act on 05.11.2024. The last date of registration is 31.03.2025. The six months prior to the end of provisional registration starts on 30.09.2024. Admittedly, the assessee has filed the application only on 05.11.2024. When the power for granting the registration is available with an authority, the power to condone the delay in filing the application is also available with the authority. This is a part of principle of natural justice and judicial jurisprudence. Before rejecting an application for registration on account of delay, it would be worthwhile to grant the assessee an opportunity of being heard. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal in respect of grant of registration u/s.80G of the Act is restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) for granting the assessee adequate opportunity to explain the delay in filing the application for regular registration u/s.80G of the Act.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/08/2025.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →