SATYAWATI DEVI GAU SEVA NYAS,PILKHUWA GHAZIABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW, VIBHUTI KHAND, GOMTI NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5209/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 December 2025AY 2025-20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. This was done in the interest of justice due to potential communication gaps.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2025-26 was filed with a delay of 172 days. The assessee contended that communication gaps prevented them from presenting all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case properly before the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps, warranting a remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 04.12.2025Pronounced: 04.12.2025

Date of hearing 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 04.12.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2025-26, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short, the “CIT(E)”], Lucknow’s DIN and order no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071513057(1), dated 24.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Delay of 172 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(E). The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →