ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR,CHANDIGARH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), NANGAL, NANGAL

ITA 986/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the Arya Samaj Mandir against the orders of the CIT(E), Chandigarh, which rejected the applications for registration under section 12AB and for approval under section 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the rejection of the registration application on the grounds that the trust had commenced activities prior to obtaining provisional registration. The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had not adequately examined the materials provided by the assessee nor offered a proper hearing, leading to the decision to set aside the CIT(E)'s orders and remand the matters for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840944 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANAV BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी क ृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 985 & 986/Chd/ 2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2024-25 Arya Samaj Mandir Sector 27C, Chandigarh-160019 बनाम The ITO Ward 1(1), Nangal ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAEAA6839J अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22/01/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order PER KRINWANT SAHAY, A.M: Both the above appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(E) Chandigarh each dt. 16/06/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2024-25. 2. Since both the above appeals were heard together therefore they are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. We shall take up the appeal in ITA No. 985/Chd/2025 as a lead case for discussion wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(E) has erred in rejecting registration application moved u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) even when the appellant was eligible for the same. 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Worthy CIT(E) deserves to be quashed since the same has been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. Printed from counselvise.com 2 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust/society had filed an application for registration, which came was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) mainly on the ground that the assessee had already commenced its activities much prior to the grant of provisional registration and, therefore, the provisional registration itself was treated as bad in law. On this reasoning alone, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application without entering into a detailed examination of the genuineness of activities or compliance with the objects of the trust. 5. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(E) the assessee preferred in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. During the course of hearing the Ld. AR argued that the Ld. CIT(E) neither looked into details already filed nor gave any opportunity to the assessee to argue its case. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(E) 8. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the material available on record. It is noticed that the rejection of registration has been made primarily on a technical interpretation relating to the timing of commencement of activities vis-à-vis the provisional registration. However, the provisions of section 12AB envisage that while processing an application for registration, the authority is required to examine the objects of the trust and the genuineness of its activities after granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. 8.1 In the present case, although certain notices were issued, the impugned order does not reflect a proper and holistic examination of the material placed on record by the assessee, nor does it deal with the assessee’s explanations in a reasoned manner. The rejection appears to have been made without fully appreciating the legal position and without adjudicating the matter on merits in accordance with law. Printed from counselvise.com 3 8.2 In the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the matter requires fresh examination at the level of the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. Now, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 986/Chd/2025, which arises from the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh dated 16.06.2025, whereby the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB seeking approval under section 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was rejected. 10. The facts and issues involved in this appeal are closely connected with those involved in ITA No. 985/Chd/2025. The rejection under section 80G(5) has been made mainly by placing reliance on the findings recorded in the order rejecting registration under section 12AB, along with certain observations regarding the religious nature of activities. 11. Since we have already set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in ITA No. 985/Chd/2025 and restored the matter for fresh adjudication, we find it appropriate and logical that the impugned order passed under section 80G(5) should also be set aside. The eligibility of the assessee for approval under section 80G is consequential and cannot be conclusively decided without a proper and lawful determination of the assessee’s registration status and examination of its objects and activities. 11.1 Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) in ITA No. 986/Chd/2025 is also set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration in accordance with law, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 4 12. In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- लिलत क ुमार क ृणवȶ सहाय (LALIET KUMAR) (KRINWANT SAHAY) Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "