Brahmashree Mittur Purohitha Thimmayya Bhatta Samprathishtana R Vs CIT (ITAT Bangalore)
Bangalore ITAT Restores 80G Approval Application, Holds CIT(E) Ignored Documents Filed Before Passing Rejection Order
The Bangalore ITAT set aside the rejection of a charitable trust’s application for approval under section 80G, holding that the CIT(E) wrongly proceeded on the assumption that the assessee had not responded to the notices, despite documents having been filed before the order was passed.
The assessee, Brahmashree Mittur Purohitha Thimmayya Bhatta Samprathishtana R, had applied for 80G approval on 25 January 2025. The CIT(E) rejected the application on the ground that the trust had failed to respond to notices and had not furnished the documents necessary to establish the genuineness of its activities.
The Tribunal noted that although the notice dated 3 July 2025 required the assessee to furnish details by 10 July 2025, the records showed that the trust had in fact uploaded the required documents on the Department’s portal on 23 July 2025. Since the CIT(E) passed the rejection order only on 29 July 2025, those documents were already available for consideration.
Holding that the CIT(E)’s observation that the assessee had not responded to the notices was factually incorrect, the Tribunal concluded that the order was not a well-considered one. It therefore set aside the order and remanded the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration of the documents already filed, while also permitting the assessee to furnish any additional material in support of its claim for 80G approval. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(E), Bangalore dated 29/07/2025 in which the approval sought for u/s. 80G has been rejected..
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered charitable trust and they applied for approval u/s. 80G of the Act on 25/01/2025. Thereafter the Ld.CIT(E) had granted an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld.CIT(E) was of the view that the assessee had not responded to the notices and therefore concluded that the assessee had not submitted the necessary documents to prove the genuineness of the activities of the trust and on that basis, the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the approval sought for by the assessee.
3. As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
4. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore we heard the Ld.CIT.DR and decided the appeal on merits. The Ld.CIT.DR submitted that since the assessee had not responded within the time granted by the Ld.CIT(E), the Ld.CIT(E) had passed the order by rejecting the application which is in order.
5. We have heard the arguments of the Ld.CIT.DR and perused the materials available on record.
6. We have considered the order of the Ld.CIT(E) in which he has specifically pointed out that the assessee had not responded to the notices issued by him and therefore for the non-compliance of the notices, the Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the said application. In the said order, the Ld.CIT(E) had relied on the notice dated 03/07/2025 and 17/07/2025. As per the said notice dated 03/07/2025, the assessee has to file the required details on or before 10/07/2025. We have also perused the acknowledgements downloaded from the portal of the department dated 23/07/2025 in which the assessee had furnished several documents through the portal. Even though the due date for submission was on 10/07/2025, the assessee submitted the said details on 23/07/2025, which does not prevent the Ld.CIT(E) to consider the said documents since the order has been passedon 29/07/2025 i.e. after the date of filing the details. In fact, in the order, the Ld.CIT(E) had observed that the assessee had not responded to the said notices which we found that the same is not correct. Therefore, the order of the Ld.CIT(E) is not a well-considered one and requires reconsideration. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and remit the issue to him for reconsideration based on the documents furnished by the assessee. We also permit the assessee to furnish more documents, if it is necessary, before the Ld.CIT(E).
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05th August, 2026.
