Application u/s 80G dismissed without discussing objects/activities – issue restored

ITAT restored the application for approval u/s 80G observing that CIT(E) did not discuss the objects and activities carried-out by the trust

In a recent judgment, ITAT Hyderabad observing that CIT(E) did not discuss the objects and activities carried-out by the trust which showed that he dismissed the application filed in Form-10AB without even considering the relevant application.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4549 (2025) (05) abcaus.in ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(E) in rejecting the application in Form-10AB for registration u/s 80G of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The appellant assessee-trust was a charitable institution and had filed application in Form No.10AB seeking for registration under section 80G of the Act. The CIT(Exemption) called for certain information from the assessee-trust. In response, the assessee-trust had also furnished relevant information / documents.

However, the CIT(E) being not satisfied with the submissions made by the appellant-trust, rejected the application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec. 80G of the Act.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that the CIT(E) had simply rejected the application of the appellant trust filed in Form10AB for registration u/sec. 80G of the Act. In support of this contention, the attention of the Bench was drawn to the observations of the CIT(E) in the order wherein the CIT(E) observed that, the application in Form-10AB is to be decided in time bound manner and non-submission of mandatory information, the present application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec. 80G was infructuous and rejected as nonmaintainable.

The assessee accordingly, submitted that, adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant-trust had not been provided by the CIT(E) and, therefore, one more opportunity may be provided to the appellant trust to substantiate it’s case by remitting the matter back to the CIT(E) for afresh adjudication. 

On the other hand, the Revenue, supporting the order of CIT(E) submitted that, the assessee-trust failed to prove it’s onus of charitable activities carried out by it with supporting documents to the satisfaction of the CIT(E), and therefore he rejected the application filed by the assessee trust u/sec. 80G of the Act and that the order of the CIT(E) is in accordance with law.

The Tribunal observed that the assessee trust had made an application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec. 80G of the Act. However, the CIT(E), we find that, the learned CIT(E) had not provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee trust and simply rejected the application filed by the assessee trust in Form10AB for registration u/sec. 80G of the Act, without considering the documentary evidences filed by the assessee trust which was evident from his order itself where there were no discussion about the submissions made by the assessee trust and the reasons for decision by the CIT(E) for rejection of registration of assessee trust u/sec.80G of the Act.

The Tribunal further observed that the CIT(E) dismissed the application filed by the assessee in a casual manner by repeating or copying the contents from some other order which was also evident from the findings of CIT(E) where CIT(E) observed that, the application in Form-10AB is to be decided in time bound manner and  non-submission of mandatory information, the present application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec. 80G is infructuous and herewith rejected as non-maintainable. Further, the CIT(E) never discussed the objects of the appellant trust and activities carried-out by the assessee trust during the relevant assessment year.

The Tribunal opined that it was undisputedly clear that the CIT(E) dismissed the application filed by the assessee without even considering the relevant application filed in Form-10AB and other evidences filed in support of the application.

Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) and restored issue the back to the file of CIT(E) with a direction to redecide the issue afresh, after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Exemption u/s 54 allowed despite failure to deposit in Capital Gains Accounts Scheme
• No addition to be made in hands of assessee solely on basis of uncorroborated loose-sheet
• Claim of Leave Encashment exemption u/s 10(10AA)(ii) dismissed beyond Rs. 3 lakhs
• AO took a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat was 25 lakh – ITAT
• Shareholders can’t be taxed for income from properties owned by the company – HC