MISSION TABLE TENNIS DEVELOPMENT TRUST,KOLKATA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2496/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 January 2026Bench: Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not appear before the CIT(E) or the Tribunal, and the application was rejected for non-compliance without considering the merits. The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the CIT(E) for re-examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a trust, filed an application for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, which was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) due to non-compliance. The assessee appealed this order but failed to appear before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the registration application under Section 80G by the CIT(E) was justified due to non-compliance and the assessee's failure to appear, and whether the matter should be remanded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH KOLKATA

आदेश / ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the CIT(Exemption), Patna rejecting application for registration u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) respectively.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust and an application in Form 10AB was filed by the assessee for grant of application for registration u/s 80G of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s 80G of the Act due to non- compliance on behalf of the assessee.

3.

Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee has filed the present appeals before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the assessee did not turn up before this Bench although Registry has issued Mission Table Tennis Development Trust notices to the assessee. As no one turned up at the time of hearing, we cannot keep this appeal pending for inordinate period, therefore, we heard the matters with the assistance of the ld. DR.

4.

The ld. DR stated that the assessee is a habitual defaulter and it did not turn up before the ld. CIT(E) and even before this Bench, therefore, the present appeal needs to be dismissed in limine.

7.

We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the assessee did not turn up before the ld. CIT(E) and the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s 80G of the Act due to non-compliance and without considering the merits of the case of the assessee. We, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, feel it necessary to remand the issue back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to comply all notices and submit all the relevant documents/details during the remand proceedings for granting of application for registration u/s 80G of the Act.

5.

In terms of the above, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →