Case Law Details
Lotsawa Rinchen Zangpo Education Trust Vs CIT (Exemptions) (ITAT Delhi)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, dealt with two connected appeals involving the same assessee. One appeal related to rejection of an application under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, while the other concerned rejection of approval under section 80G(5). Since both matters were interconnected, they were decided through a common order.
The Tribunal noted that, in the proceedings relating to section 12AB, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) had granted several opportunities of hearing, but these were allegedly not availed of by the assessee. Consequently, the application under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) was rejected mainly on the ground of non-pursuance. Similarly, the application for approval under section 80G(5) was rejected on the grounds of non-pursuance and because the section 12AB application had already been rejected.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that adequate opportunity had not been provided and that detailed replies had been filed but were not considered. The Tribunal observed that the impugned orders did not clearly indicate whether any replies had been filed or whether there had been compliance by the assessee. In the interest of substantive justice, ITAT set aside both orders and remitted the matters back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
SEO-Friendly Titles with SEO Descriptions
ITAT Remands 12AB and 80G Applications as CIT(E) Orders Lacked Clarity on Assessee’s Compliance
SEO Description: ITAT Delhi remitted matters relating to sections 12AB and 80G after finding that the impugned orders did not clearly establish whether the assessee had filed replies or complied with notices. The cases were sent back for fresh adjudication in the interest of substantive justice.
Fresh Adjudication Ordered Because Rejection of 12AB and 80G Applications Was Based on Non-Pursuance: ITAT
SEO Description: The Tribunal set aside the rejection of applications under sections 12AB and 80G that had been dismissed primarily on grounds of non-pursuance. ITAT directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) to reconsider the matters afresh.
ITAT Sends Back Exemption Applications Because Record Did Not Clearly Show Whether Replies Were Considered
SEO Description: ITAT observed that it was unclear from the orders whether the assessee had filed responses to the notices issued by CIT(E). The Tribunal remanded both matters for fresh examination and decision.
80G Rejection Set Aside Because It Was Linked to 12AB Denial Sent Back for Reconsideration: ITAT
SEO Description: The Tribunal noted that the rejection of approval under section 80G was partly based on the earlier rejection under section 12AB. Since the 12AB matter was remitted, the connected 80G issue was also restored for fresh adjudication.
Matters Under Sections 12AB and 80G Remitted Because Substantive Justice Required Fresh Consideration: ITAT
SEO Description: ITAT Delhi held that both applications deserved reconsideration to ensure substantive justice. The impugned orders were set aside and the issues were remitted to CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
This is a batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee. While ITA No.1137/Del/2026 pertains to an order u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”); ITA No.1138/Del/2026 pertains to an application u/s 80G of the Act being rejected. Since both these cases are inter-connected, hence, they are being disposed of through a single order.
2. On the last date of hearing, none attended on behalf of the assessee, but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR.
3. In this case, in ITA No.1137/Del/2026 pertaining to an order u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Act, it is seen that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) had granted several opportunities of hearing but the same were not availed of by the assessee. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act mainly on the ground of non-persuasion.
3.1 Similarly in ITA No.1138/Del/2026, the assessee’s application for approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act was rejected on the ground of non-persuasion as also on the ground that the application u/s 12AB of the Act had been rejected.
4. The Appellant has approached the ITAT with grounds challenging the denial of opportunity and also stating that detailed replies had already been filed but the same were not considered by the Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Delhi.
4.1 The Ld. DR ably assisted the Bench and pointed out that from a reading of the impugned orders it could not be ascertained whether the assessee had filed any reply or even whether there was any compliance by the assessee to the opportunities provided by the Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Delhi.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions of Ld. DR and have gone through the documents before us. We feel that in the interests of substantive justice, both these matters deserve to be remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication and consideration. To this extent, we set aside the impugned orders in both the appeals.
6. In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes having been remitted back.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03.06.2026
Author Bio
