Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee's applications for grant of registration under Section 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) by an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to produce further documents. The Assessee appealed this rejection.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(E) should have provided an opportunity to the Assessee to produce documentary evidence to substantiate its claim for charitable activities before rejecting the application. The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E).
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration application without providing an opportunity to the Assessee to produce necessary documents and evidence.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Subhash Gulati Foundation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax A-255, Defence Colony Exemption, Civic Centre, Defence Colony, New Delhi Minto Road, New Delhi PAN: AAQCS8813A Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. R. K. Kapoor, Adv& Sh. Prince Chugh, Adv Revenue by Ms. PoojaSwaroop, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 06/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: These two appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-, New Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated 20/03/2025 wherein the application filed by the Assessee for grant of registration u/s 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) has been rejected.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the orders impugned have been passed ex-parte, wherein Ld. CIT(E)has not verified the documents produced by the Appellant and without providing opportunity to the appellant to produce further documents and submissions the orders impugned has been passed without issuing a show cause notice of further queries. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeals.
The Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the appellant has failed to substantiate the claim in support of the applications filed before the authority below, therefore, the applications have been rightly rejected which requires no interference at the hands of the Tribunal. Thus, relying on the orders of the Lower Authority, sought for dismissal of the Appeals.
We have heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application on the ground that the applicant has failed to file documentary evidences to substantiate the claim of the Appellant. Considering the fact that the Assessee is claimed to be conducting charitable activities, the Ld. CIT(E) should have provided opportunity to the appellant to produce the documents and should have decided the application on its merit.
Thus, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce all the requisite documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant. Further, considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we direct the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the application within two months form the date of receipt of this order.
In the result, the appeals of the Appellantare partly allowed for statistical purpose.