STAGE DOOR,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1338/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 December 2025AY 2025-26Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)4 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 restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(E), directing them to decide the appeal afresh after providing the assessee with adequate opportunity of being heard and considering the evidence. The assessee was directed to cooperate and furnish necessary documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(E) rejecting their application for approval under Section 80G and cancellation of provisional registration. The assessee's counsel did not appear at the hearing before the CIT(E), and their application for adjournment was allegedly not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred by not considering the assessee's adjournment application and deciding the matter ex-parte without affording proper opportunity. Whether the rejection of the application for approval under Section 80G and cancellation of provisional registration was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Respondent: Shri D.S. Sidhu, CIT-DR
Hearing: 25.11.2025Pronounced: 25.11.2025

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. ld. CIT(E), Delhi dated 19.12.2024 pertaining to A.Y 2025-26.

2.

The sole issue argued before us by the assessee pertains to the rejection of application filed in Form 10AB seeking approval u/s 80G and 2023-24.

3.

None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee. We decided to proceed ex-parte qua the assessee with the assistance of the ld DR. So we heard the ld. DR at length and perused the materials on record.

4.

Before us, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer and read the relevant part of the assessment order. It is the say of the ld. DR that the ld. CIT(E) was quite justified in rejecting of application filed in Form 10AB seeking approval u/s 80G and cancellation of provisional registration issued from A.Y 2021-22 to A.Y 2023-24.

5.

We have heard the submissions of the ld. DR and have perused the relevant material on record. We find from the records that the ld. counsel for the assessee had filed an application for adjournment dated 25.11.2025 before the CIT(E) stating that he has not received the records of the instant appeal from the assessee and hence requested for 4 weeks to prepare the appeal. The ld CIT(E) passed the order without considering the said application.

In view of the factual matrix of the instant case, in the interest 6. of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to restore the Page 2 of 4 [A.Y 2025-26] Stage Door Vs. CIT [E] appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the evidences/material furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence as required by the ld. CIT(E).

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →