SAHIB SHRI GURU TEG BAHADUR NISHKAM SOCIETY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD EXEMPTION-2(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3238/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 September 2025AY 2024-252 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter back to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(Exemption) is directed to provide three effective opportunities of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear and present all relevant facts before the lower authority due to communication gaps. Consequently, their applications for registration under sections 12A and 80G were not adjudicated on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's applications for registration were properly adjudicated on merits, and if communication gaps prejudiced the assessee's right to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii),Section 12A,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

Hearing: 29.09.2025Pronounced: 29.09.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 3238/Del/2025
ITA No. 3237/Del/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Asstt. Year : 2024-25 : Asstt. Year : 2025-26 Sahib Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Vs Income Tax Officer, Nishkam Sewa Society, Ward Exemption-2(1), C-17, First Floor, Ajay Enclve, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110027 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKTS3791C Assessee by : Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 29.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These assessee’s twin appeals in & 3238 / Del / 2025 for Assessment Years 2024-25 and 2025-26, arise against the CIT (Exemption), Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/ 1065986022(1) and ITBA / EXM /F/EXM45/2023-24/1058272586(1) dated 28.11.2023 & 24.06.2024, in proceedings u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

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

4.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective adjudication of the assessee’s sections 12A and 80G registration applications on merits as well in absence of the relevant supportive evidence. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s both these appeals back to the CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing, at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii)

All 150 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →