[2025] 175 taxmann.com 259 (Hyderabad - Trib.

)[06-05-2025]

INCOME TAX : Where Commissioner (Exemptions) rejected application filed by

assessee-trust for registration under section 80G without considering documentary
evidences filed by assessee-trust and other evidences filed in support of application,
matter was to be remanded back to Commissioner (Exemptions) to decide same
afresh

■■■

[2025] 175 taxmann.com 259 (Hyderabad - Trib.)

IN THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH 'B'
Dhatri
v.
Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)*
MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IT APPEAL. NO. 1393 (HYD.) OF 2024
MAY 6, 2025

Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Donation to certain funds, charitable
institutions (Procedure for registration) - Assessee-trust filed application in Form No. 10AB
seeking registration under section 80G - Commissioner (Exemptions) being not satisfied
with submissions made by assessee-trust, rejected application - It was found that
Commissioner (Exemptions) had not provided adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee-
trust and simply rejected application filed by assessee-trust in Form-10AB for registration
under section 80G, without considering documentary evidences filed by assessee-trust -
Further, Commissioner (Exemptions) never discussed objects of assessee trust and
activities carried-out by assessee-trust during relevant assessment year and dismissed
application filed by assessee without even considering relevant application filed in Form-
10AB and other evidences filed in support of application - Whether therefore, order of
Commissioner (Exemptions) was to be set aside and matter remanded back to
Commissioner (Exemptions) to decide same afresh - Held, yes [Para 6] [Matter remanded]
FACTS

■ The assessee-trust filed an application in Form No. 10AB seeking for registration under section 80G. The
Commissioner (Exemptions) had called for certain information from the assessee-trust. In response, the
assessee-trust had also furnished relevant information/documents.
■ However, the Commissioner (Exemptions) being not satisfied with the submissions made by the assessee-
trust, had rejected the application in Form No. 10AB for registration under section 80G.
■ On appeal to the Tribunal :
HELD

■ It is found that, admittedly, the assessee-trust has made an application in Form-10AB for registration
under section 80G. However, on perusal of the order of the Commissioner (Exemptions), it is found that,
the Commissioner (Exemptions) had not provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee-trust
 and simply rejected the application filed by the assessee-trust in Form-10AB for registration under section
80G, without considering the documentary evidences filed by the assessee-trust which is 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 Commissioner (Exemptions) for rejection of registration of assessee-trust
under section 80G. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the application filed by the assessee in
a casual manner by repeating or copying the contents from some other order which is evident from the
findings of the Commissioner (Exemptions) order where the Commissioner (Exemptions) 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 under section 80G is infructuous and
herewith rejected as non-maintainable. Further, the Commissioner (Exemptions) never discussed the
objects of the appellant trust and activities carried-out by the assessee-trust during the relevant assessment
year. From the above order of the Commissioner (Exemptions), it is undisputedly clear that the
Commissioner (Exemptions) 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 order of the Commissioner (Exemptions) is set aside and this issue is restored back to the file of the
Commissioner (Exemptions) with a direction to re-decide the issue afresh, after providing an adequate
opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed
for statistical purposes. [Para 6]
Smt. S. Sandhya, Adv. for the Appellant. Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR for the Respondent.
ORDER

Manjunatha G, Accountant Member. - This appeal has been filed by the Assessee-Trust against the order
dated 22.10.2024 of the learned CIT(E) in rejecting the application filed by the assessee trust in Form-10AB
for registration u/sec.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short "the Act"].
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, the assessee-trust is a charitable institution and has filed application
in Form No.10AB seeking for registration u/sec.80G of the Act. The learned CIT(E) had called for certain
information from the assessee-trust. In response, the assessee-trust had also furnished relevant information /
documents. However, the learned CIT(E) being not satisfied with the submissions made by the appellant-trust,
had rejected the application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec.80G of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee trust is now in appeal before the Tribunal.
4. Smt. S. Sandhya, Advocate-Learned Counsel for the Assessee, submitted that, the learned CIT(E) had
simply rejected the application of the appellant trust filed in Form-10AB for registration u/sec.80G of the Act.
In support of this contention, she drew the attention of the Bench with respect to the observations of the
learned CIT(A) in para-3 of the order wherein the learned 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. She, accordingly, submitted that, adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant-trust has
not been provided by the learned CIT(E) and, therefore, one more opportunity may please be provided to the
appellant trust to substantiate it's case by remitting the matter back to the learned CIT(E) for afresh
adjudication.
5. MS. M. Narmada, learned CIT-DR, on the other hand, supporting the order of learned CIT(E) submitted
that, the assessee-trust has made the application for registration in Form-10AB for registration u/sec.80G of
the Act. She further submitted that, since the assessee trust has failed to prove it's onus of charitable activities
carried-out by it with supporting documents to the satisfaction of the learned CIT(E), he rejected the
application filed by the assessee trust u/sec.80G of the Act and that the order of the learned CIT(E) is in
accordance with law. She accordingly submitted that the order of the learned CIT(E) be confirmed since it is
not a fit case for reconsideration by the learned CIT(E).
6. We have heard both the parties, perused the material on record and the orders of the authorities below. We
find that, admittedly, the assessee trust has made an application in Form-10AB for registration u/sec.80G of
the Act. However, on perusal of the order of the learned 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 Form-10AB for registration u/sec.80G of the Act, without considering the documentary
evidences filed by the assessee trust which is evident from para-3 of his order itself where there were no
discussion about the submissions made by the assessee trust and the reasons for decision by the learned
CIT(E) for rejection of registration of assessee trust u/sec.80G of the Act. Further, the learned CIT(A)
dismissed the application filed by the assessee in a casual manner by repeating or copying the contents from
some other order which is evident from the findings in para-3 of learned CIT(E)'s order where the learned
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 learned CIT(E) never discussed the
objects of the appellant trust and activities carried-out by the assessee trust during the relevant assessment
year. From the above order of the learned CIT(E), it is undisputedly clear that the learned 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, we set aside the order of the learned CIT(E) and
restore this issue back to the file of learned CIT(E) with a direction to redecide the issue afresh, after
providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the
assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
■■

*Matter remanded.