RAM MANOHAR EDUCATIONAL AND SAMUDAI BAL VIKAS SOCIETY,DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPATION, DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4286/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 November 2025Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)2 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 considered that communication gaps might have occurred and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order by the CIT(Exemption) that declined its claim for Section 80G registration due to incomplete details. The CIT(E) had proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication due to potential communication gaps and ex-parte proceedings.

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 BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Ms. Priya Sharma, Adv
Hearing: 19.11.2025Pronounced: 19.11.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal arises against the CIT(Exemption), Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025- 26/1076566185(1) dated 30.05.2025, in proceedings u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(E)’s detailed discussion has quoted the assessee’s failure in filing all the relevant details thereby declining it’s claim of section 80G registrations as a charitable trust.

Ram Manohar Educational and Samudai Bal Vikas Society 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(E) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and it’s arguing counsel/auditor could not be altogether ruled out.

5.

Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the learned CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at it’s own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 80G

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →