SHRI SHYAM PREM MANDAL GURGAON,GURGAON vs. CIT EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7335/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 April 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Exemption) rejected the application without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application, stating the assessee failed to prove genuine charitable activities and was not heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the registration application without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard and without proper substantiation of the assessee's charitable activities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: Adv (Through VC)
Hearing: 25/03/2026Pronounced: 15/04/2026

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) -Chandigarh(‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short), Chandigarh dated 29/10/2025.

2.

The appellant filed an application for registration u/s 12A (1)

(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The said application has been rejected vide order dated 29/10/2025 by the CIT(E) on the ground that the applicant has failed to discharge the onus cast upon it to establish that it is engaged in genuine charitable activities in accordance with its stated objects.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the order impugned has been passed in violation of principals of natural justice, the Ld. CIT(E) has not provided the opportunity of being heard to the Appellant, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee has failed to discharge the onus cast upon it to establish that it is engaged in genuine charitable activities in accordance with its stated objects, thus the order impugned has been rightly passed by the Ld. CIT(E), therefore, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

5.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for want of documents to substantiate the claim of the Appellant and the Appellant has not been heard before passing the orders impugned. 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 any/all documents in support of its claim.

6.

In the result, the appeals of the Appellant partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15th April, 2026

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →