Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee's applications for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were rejected ex-parte by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (CIT(E)). The Assessee contended that the CIT(E) did not verify the documents or provide an opportunity to produce further evidence regarding its charitable activities.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications without providing the Assessee adequate opportunity to present documentary evidence to substantiate its charitable activities. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration after providing the Appellant a proper hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) can reject applications for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G without providing the applicant a proper opportunity of being heard and to submit documentary evidence.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
Shree Shiv SewakVridh Vs The Commissioner of Income Ashram, 2C/16A, New Tax (Exemption), 26th Floor, Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, Civic Centre, E-2, Block, Minto New Delhi-110005, Road, Delhi PAN: AAPAS1019R Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 03/09/2025 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)-, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short) dated31/12/2024 wherein the applications filed by the Assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and for approval under Section 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. 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 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 thatthe 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 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 claims of the Appellant.
In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd September, 2025