PRACHEEN SHRI AGGARWAL DIGAMBER JAIN PANCHAYAT DELHI,DELHI V. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

ITA 3542/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Pracheen Shri Aggarwal Digamber Jain Panchayat, the Appellant, contesting the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) - Delhi, the Respondent, regarding the rejection of their application for approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The initial rejection was based on the timeliness of the application and subsequently on the grounds that the expenditure incurred on charitable activities exceeded 100% of the receipts. The Tribunal had previously remanded the matter for a fresh decision, which led to the current appeal following another rejection by the CIT(E). The Appellant sought to introduce additional evidence to substantiate their claims, which was initially not considered by the CIT(E).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780436 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISHA S. GUPT
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI PRATAP MALL; UMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 3542/Del/2025 Pracheen Shri Agarwal Digamber Jain Vs. CIT(E) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3542/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2023-24) Pracheen Shri Aggarwal Digamber Jain Panchayat Delhi, 2515-17, Dharampura, Delhi- 110006 PAN: AABAP2564J Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv& Sh. Uma Shankar, Adv Revenue by Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 07/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 10/10/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) –Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(E)’ for short), Delhi dated 13/05/2025. 2. The appellant filed an Application for approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The said application has been rejected vide order dated 28/03/2024on the ground that the application has not been filed on time. Aggrieved by the order dated 28/03/2024, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 3542/Del/2025 Pracheen Shri Agarwal Digamber Jain Vs. CIT(E) 1673/Del/2024. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 20/08/2024, remanded the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for deciding the issue afresh. In pursuant to the order of the Tribunal dated 20/08/2024, the Ld. CIT(E) once again decided the application filed by the Appellant and vide order impugned dated 13/05/2025, dismissed the Application on the ground that expenditure incurred on the charitable activities are more than 100% of receipts. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E) dated 13/05/2025, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 3. The Appellant filed an application under Rule 29 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules for production of additional evidence, by producing copy of the audited accounts of all 31 Units of the Assessee to substantiate the claim that the expenditure incurred were not in the nature of religious expenditure. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has not provided opportunity to produce the requisite documents to show that the expenditure incurred were not in the nature of religious expenditure, therefore, filed application under Rule 29 of the Rules for admission of the same and sought for allowing the application and prayed for remanding the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 3542/Del/2025 Pracheen Shri Agarwal Digamber Jain Vs. CIT(E) 5. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Appellant has not provided requisite documents, therefore the Ld. CIT(E) rightly passed the order impugned, which requires no interference. Thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal. 6. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application on the ground that expenditure incurred on the charitable activities is more than 100% of receipts. Now, by way of additional evidence, the Assessee has produced the copy of audited accounts of all 31 Units before us to support the claim of the Assessee that expenditure incurred were not in the nature of religious expenditure. In our considered opinion, the additional evidence produced by the applicant will go into the roots of the matter which requires to be examined by the Ld. CIT(E) in order to come to the just conclusion. Therefore, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider all the documents produced by the Appellant and decide the application afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to produce any/all documents in support of its claim. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 3542/Del/2025 Pracheen Shri Agarwal Digamber Jain Vs. CIT(E) 7. In the result, the appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th October, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 10.10.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "