AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The captioned appeals filed by the separate assessees are directed against the respective orders of the Ld. CIT (Exemption), Chandigarh passed u/s. 12AB(1)(b)(ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and u/s. 80G of the Act respectively. Since common issues have been involved in these appeals, hence, the appeals were heard together and disposed by this common order by dealing with the facts of ITA No. 1071 & 1072/Del/2026 being the lead cases.
The grounds raised in ITA No. 1071/Del/2026 read as under:-
1.That the CIT(E), Chandigarh has erred, both in law and on facts, in rejecting the appellant’s application seeking registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) r.w.s. 12AB vide her order dated 12.11.2025.
2.That on facts, law and legal position of the case, the CIT(E) has erred in passing a mechanical, non-speaking and cryptic order without conducting the mandatory inquiry into the appellant’s objects, accounts, activities and evidences on record.
3.That on facts, law and legal position of the case, the CIT(E) has failed to appreciate that the appellant had a valid and continuing registration u/s. 12AB and also a regular registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii), or treated as superseded except by following the specific cancellation procedure laid down in S. 12AB(4).
4.That on the facts, circumstances of the case, the order passed by the CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
5.That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.
The grounds raised in ITA No. 1072/Del/2026 read as under:-
1.That the CIT(E), Chandigarh has erred, both in law and on facts, in rejecting the appellant’s application seeking approval u/s. 80G vide her order dated 12.11.2025.
2.That on facts, law and legal position of the case, the CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application u/s. 80G solely on the ground that registration u/s. 12AB was not granted, without examining the application on merits.
3.That on the facts, circumstances of the case, the order passed by the CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
4.That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed application in Form 10AB u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act on 22.8.2025. On scrutiny of the above, it was noted by the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh that the documents provided by the applicant are not sufficient for assessing the genuineness of the activities of the trust. It also could not be verified from the available documents whether the applicant is complying with the objects mentioned in the trust deed or not. In order to examine and verify whether the activities of the trust or the institution are in accordance with its objects, the genuineness of its activities and compliance with such requirements of any other law for the time being in force as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a questionnaire was issued electronically on 11.9.2025 requesting the applicant to furnish the documents/details in support of its claim for grant of registration u/s. 12A of the Act, but the same remain un-complied, after giving various opportunities. The applicant did not furnish the requisite details/documents and as a result thereof, ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the Applicant for grant of registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii). Similarly, assessee further filed an application under Form 10AB on 26.8.2025 for approval u//s. 80G. Ld. CIT(A) noted that an application u/s. 12AB was filed on 22.8.2025 and rejected vide order dated 12.11.2025 due to the fact that the in the absence of registration u/s. 12AB the assessee is not entitled for grant of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act, hence, the same was also rejected by the CIT(E). Aggrieved, assessee is in appeals before us.
Ld. AR submitted that CIT(E), Chandigarh has erred, in rejecting the assessee’s application seeking registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) r.w.s. 12AB vide order dated 12.11.2025 which is mechanical, non-speaking and cryptic order without conducting the mandatory inquiry into the assessee’s objects, accounts, activities and evidences on record. It was the further contention of the Ld. AR that CIT(E) has failed to appreciate that the assessee had a valid and continuing registration u/s. 12AB and also a regular registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii), or treated as superseded except by following the specific cancellation procedure laid down in S. 12AB(4). It was further submitted that the order passed by the CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the further contention of the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT€ rejected the application u/s. 80G solely on the ground that registration u/s. 12AB was not granted, without examining the application on merits and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Ld. DR relied upon the orders of Ld. CIT(E).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. It is an admitted fact that Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application of the assessee filed in Form 10AB u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act for non-furnishing of requisite submissions /details/documents by the applicant and approval u/s. 80G was also rejected in the absence of registration u/s. 12A of the Act. Keeping in view of the aforesaid factual matrix and in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to consider the issues afresh in both the appeals, in accordance with law by considering all the relevant documents, evidences etc. to be filed by the applicant. However, Applicant is directed to furnish the complete details/ evidences before the Ld. CIT(E) in accordance with law and fully cooperate in the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.
In the result, both the appeals viz. ITA No. 1071 & 1072/Del/2026 (Shri Langer Sewa Samiti) filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid manner.
As regards other remaining appeals viz. ITA No. 1073/Del/2026 (Bhajan Devi Memorial Trust); ITA Nos. 1074 & 1075/Del/2026 (Shree Rama Club Charitable Trust) and ITA No. 1078/Del/2026 (Jai Baba Ramdev Sewa Samiti) are concerned, our aforesaid decision taken in para no. 7 of this order, will apply mutatis mutandis to these appeals also. Accordingly, the afore-noted remaining appeals also stand allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid manner.
In the result, all the 06 appeals of the separate assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.