AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The assessee has filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(E)”, for short] dated 17.03.2026 under section 12AB and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We are proceeding to decide the appeals with the help of ld. DR of the Revenue.
Heard ld. DR of the Revenue and perused the material on record. We observed that the ld. CIT (E) rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on the ground that the assessee failed to submit the reply. We also observed that ld. CIT (E) rejected the registration on the basis of non-containing the express clause on irrevocability. We observed that Hon’ble High Court of Bombay had held contrary to the action of the ld. CIT (E) in the case of Chamber of Tax Consultants vs. CIT(E) (2026) 184 taxmann.com 374 (Bom.). In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (E) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (E) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Similarly, the registration u/s 80G was also rejected on the same ground. The assessee is in appeal before us by filing separate appeal vide ITA No.6100/Del/2026. We remit this issue also back to the file of ld. CIT (E) in the interest of justice. Both the issues under consideration may be decided as per law.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.