SHIKSHA BHARTI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HARYANA V. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

ITA 5447/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shiksha Bharti Educational Society, a charitable society operating a school and a clinic, which appealed against the decisions of the CIT(E), Chandigarh. The CIT(E) had rejected their applications for renewal of provisional registration under sections 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, citing technical reasons related to the incorrect clause of the application form used. The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) had not considered the merits of the case and had only focused on the technicalities of the application form. The Tribunal referenced similar cases where it was directed that applications should not be rejected on such technical grounds but considered on their merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714406 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Raj Krishan Charitable Trust, ITA 1553/DEL/2024, Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust Vadtal, ITA 369/SRT/2024, Torna Rajgad Parisar Samajonnati Nyas vs CIT, ITA 2295/PUN/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAHESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: DHRUV GOEL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Charitable institution
• Section: 12A; 80G

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5447/DEL/2024 [A.Y. ] ITA No. 5448/DEL/2024 [A.Y. ] Shiksha Bharti Educational Society Vs. The C.I.T(Exemption] VPO Chattar Jind Chandigarh Haryana PAN – AAQAS 3504 C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhruv Goel, CA Department By : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, A.M:- The above captioned two separate appeals by the assessee are preferred against 2 separate orders of the CIT(E), Chandigarh dated 25.9.2024 rejecting application for renewal of provisional registration Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO Page 2 of 6 u/s 12A(1)(aciii) and 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] and approval u/s 80G of the Act respectively. 2. Since common grievance is involved in the captioned appeals, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable society & running a charitable school named \"SHIV GURUKULAM SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL\" in Jind and affiliated with HBSE (Haryana Board). Further, it is also operating charitable clinic in Jind where free of cost treatment of patients is done. Thus assessee's activities are covered u/s 2(15) and it is eligible for being registered u/s 12A of the Act. 4. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted that the CIT(E) has erred in rejecting registration for mere technical reasons of application being under wrong clause and without deliberating on merits of the case. It is prayed to consider the merits of the matter and direct ld CIT(E) to consider assessee's applications on merits under either of the provisions of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO Page 3 of 6 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that the ld. CIT(E) has not doubted genuineness of activities but only rejected registration for the reason that assessee had filed application in form 10AB u/s 12(1)(ac) (iii) while it was required to be filed u/s 12(1)(ac) (vi) (B) as per amendment made from 1-10-2023 as assessee was a trust which had already commenced its activities. Consequentially, application u/s 80G has also been rejected. 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee invited our attention to similar facts where applications were rejected for being made under incorrect clause of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act where Benches of ITAT have held that CIT(E) is required to not reject application on such technicalities and directed CIT(E) to consider the application to be filed under correct sub clause of sec 12(1)(ac) of the Act. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied on : A. ITAT Delhi in c/o Raj Krishan Charitable Trust, ITA 1553/DEL/2024 B. ITAT Surat in c/o Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust Vadtal, ITA 369/SRT/2024 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO Page 4 of 6 C. Honble Pune in case of Torna Rajgad Parisar Samajonnati Nyas vs CIT, ITA 2295/PUN/2024 (Page 69-71) 7. The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed to direct CIT(E) to consider assessee's applications u/s 12A & 80G on its merits and deem the same to be filed under clause (vi) Part-B. 8. The ld. DR fairly conceded to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has simply rejected the applications merely on technical reasons being under wrong clause and has not deliberated on the merits of the case. The ITAT has on various occasions directed the ld. CIT(A) to consider the applications under correct sub-clause. In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that the matter be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The CIT(E) is directed to rehear the applications after Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO Page 5 of 6 affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 5447 and 5448/DEL/2024 are allowed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 06.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUMITA ROY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 06th AUGUST, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4646/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2017-18] Late Satish Mehta Vs.ITO Page 6 of 6 Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order . 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "