Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee filed appeals against the orders of the Ld. CIT(E) which rejected their applications for registration under Section 12AB(1)(ii)(B) and Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee's counsel argued that the orders were passed ex-parte without proper verification or opportunity to present further documents.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(E) rejected the applications primarily on the ground of insufficient documentary evidence regarding the genuineness and commencement of charitable activities. The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) should have provided an opportunity to the assessee to produce all necessary documents before deciding the applications on merit.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications for registration without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to produce documentary evidence.
Sections Cited
12AB(1)(ii)(B), 80G(5), Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
(A.Y 2025-26) Shivalay Niketan Trust Vs. CIT(Exemption) 129, Jagjeetpur, Haridwar, C.R Building, I.P Estate, Uttarakhand New Delhi PAN: ABHTS1858C Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Samyak Jain, Adv Revenue by Sh. Amar Pal Singh, JCIT, DR Date of Hearing 08/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 10/10/2025 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)-, Lucknow (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated 26/03/2025 wherein the application filed by the Assessee for grant of registration u/s 12AB(1)(ii)(B) and of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) and the application for registration of the trust u/s. 80G(5) of the Act have 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 have been passed. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
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 both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT (E) has rejected the applications on the ground that the applicant has failed to file documentary evidences to enable me to satisfy about the genuineness& commencement of its charitable activities and to verify these activities are in consonance with its objects. Considering the fact that the Assessee is claimed to be conducting charitable activities, the Ld. Ld. CIT(E) should have provided opportunity to the appellant to produce all 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.
In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10th October, 2025