Registration of Charitable Trusts: Genuineness of Activities and Opportunity of Being Heard

By | March 11, 2026

Registration of Charitable Trusts: Genuineness of Activities and Opportunity of Being Heard


The Legal Issue

The central dispute for the Assessment Year 2024-25 (and onwards) was whether the Commissioner (Exemption) [CIT(E)] can summarily reject an application for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G without providing a meaningful opportunity to the assessee to prove the genuineness of its charitable activities.


Facts of the Case

  • The Entity: An assessee-company incorporated in April 2024 applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G.

  • The Activities: The company claimed to be engaged in:

    • Feeding cows (Gau Seva) and pilgrims.

    • Maintaining the cleanliness of holy sites.

    • Promoting education and vocational training.

  • The Rejection: The CIT(E) rejected the registration, stating that the genuineness of activities was not established. Consequently, the 80G application was also rejected as a “consequential” action.

  • Assessee’s Grievance: The company argued that it was a newly formed entity and the CIT(E) did not afford adequate time or opportunity to file the necessary clarifications and supporting documents to prove its bona fides.


The Decision

The Tribunal ruled that the principles of Natural Justice were violated and ordered a remand of both matters:

  • I. Section 12AB Registration: The Tribunal held that “genuineness” cannot be judged in a vacuum without reviewing the evidence the assessee intends to produce. Since a “reasonable opportunity” was not granted to the newly incorporated company, the matter was sent back to the CIT(E) for de novo adjudication (a fresh hearing).

  • II. Section 80G Approval: Since the rejection of the 80G approval was entirely based on the rejection of the 12AB registration, the Tribunal ruled that the 80G matter must also be remanded for fresh consideration alongside the registration application.


Key Takeaways

  • Newly Formed Entities: For companies or trusts incorporated recently (like this one in April 2024), the CIT(E) is expected to be reasonable regarding the volume of activity evidence, as the entity may still be in its nascent stages.

  • Natural Justice (Audi Alteram Partem): The Revenue cannot pass an adverse order without giving the taxpayer a fair chance to explain their case. A “Reasonable Opportunity” is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement.

  • Interlinked Applications: Section 12A/12AB registration is a prerequisite for 80G approval. If the registration appeal is won or remanded, the 80G appeal typically follows the same fate.

  • Documentation Strategy: When applying for registration, ensure you have a “Project Report” or “Activity Chart” even if physical work has just begun. This helps establish the “objects” and “genuineness” from day one.


IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH ‘C’
SCODV Foundation
v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, (Exemption)*
Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member
and Brajesh Kumar, Accountant Member
IT Appeal Nos. 1467 & 1468 (Delhi) OF 2025
FEBRUARY  18, 2026
Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR for the Respondent.
ORDER
Brajesh Kumar Singh, Accountant Member. – These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the two separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi, (hereinafter referred to ‘ld. CIT(E)’) both dated 29.01.2025 rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act) and declining the approval for application of the assessee u/s 80G of the Act. Since, both the appeals are inter-related to each other and therefore, the same are decided by this common order for convenience.
2. On the date of hearing, the assessee filed an adjournment letter on the ground that the Ld. AR due to unavoidable circumstances and prior professional commitments was not able to appear on the date of hearing. However, on perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and the material available on record and the submissions made by the assessee which are available on record, the adjournment petition filed by the Ld. AR was rejected and the appeal was heard on material available on record and after hearing the Ld. CIT (DR).
3. Brief facts of the case:- An application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act was filed by the assessee on 04.07.2024 in Form No.10AB. During the course of hearing proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a questionnaire dated 19.09.2024 requesting the assessee to file certain details in support of its claim of the application filed on 04.07.2024 for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act.
3.1 The Ld. CIT(E) noted that the applicant had not submitted the complete details required by questionnaire dated 19.09.2024 and further opportunity was provided to the assessee vide later dated 09.01.2025 to file the balance details by 15.01.2025. In the said letter it was also mentioned that in case of failure to furnish the details, the proceedings shall be decided on the basis of information available on record and no further opportunity will be granted being a limitation matter.
3.2 The Ld. CIT(E) based on the documents submitted by the assessee noted certain discrepancies as listed out in para no. 4 of the order and held that in view of these discrepancies, the applicant had failed to satisfy the genuineness of charitable nature of its activities and thus rejected the aforesaid application of assessee filed in form of 10 AB for grant of registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. The relevant findings of the CIT(E) are reproduced as under :
“4. Based on documents submitted following discrepancies are noted:
(i)Donor details is not submitted
(ii)Photos are without any details.
(iii)The applicant company is incorporated in April 2024. Accordingly no audited financial accounts are available.
(iv)Based on bills/invoices submitted it appears that the applicant has not undertaken any activity on its own and has only claimed to have made donations on account of food expenses (Parshadam).
(v)A new bills submitted are not in name of applicant but in the name of ‘ Chaitanya Vihar Gaushala’.
(vi)On the website scodv.com of the applicant, it is found that its sponsors are living in different parts of world. However in its submission it has not provided such details and no FCRA registration is shown to receive foreign funds.
5. In view of above discussion, the applicant has failed to satisfy genuineness of charitable nature of its activities. In light of above the application filed in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) is hereby rejected.”
4. Aggrieved with the said order the assessee filed an appeal before us.
4.1 In its submissions/grounds of appeal the assessee states that the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application of assessee for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act by holding that assessee failed to satisfy the genuineness of charitable nature of this activities, whereas the activities of the assessee including the feeding of cows, pilgrims, and inhabitants of holy places, maintenance of cleanliness of holy sites, and the promotion of education and vocational training in various disciplines, are all aimed at benefitting the public at large and clearly qualify as charitable and public welfare activities under the law. In support of the above claim the assessee filed a filed its profile and supporting documents paper book in which inter alia following details have been furnished:
S. No.ParticularsPage No.
5.Notes on Activities (Photograph & Documents)38-77
13.Notes on Activities (Photograph & Documents)116-142
17.Profile168

 

4.2 Further it is submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) did not afford the assessee an adequate opportunity to present clarifications or provide additional documentation supporting the charitable nature of activities and the assessee should have been given the opportunity to substantiate its claims and rectify any perceived shortcomings in its applications before rejecting its application.
5. The Ld. CIT(DR) supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E) but did not seriously object to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim of carrying out charitable activities as submitted above by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(E).
6. We have heard the Sr (DR) and perused the material available on record. The present appeal by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(E) Delhi. As discussed above the application of the assessee was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on the ground that details as called from the assessee to substantiate its claim of carrying out charitable activities was not submitted. On the other hand, the assessee has explained about its claim of carrying out charitable activities as discussed above and also submitted that adequate opportunity to present clarifications or provide additional documentation supporting the charitable nature of activities was not provided by the Ld. CIT(E). Considering the entire facts of the case and to give one more opportunity to the assessee, we deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the Ld. CIT(E) Delhi for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
7. The assessee is directed to respond to notice(s) issued by the Ld. CIT(E), without fail.
8. In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
ITA No.1468/Del/2025
9. This appeal is filed by the assessee against rejection of approval u/s 80G of the Act by the impugned order dated 29.01.2025 by the Ld. CIT(E) Delhi. The application for approval u/s 80G of the Act was filed by the assessee on 04.07.2024 in Form 10 AB. The same was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on the ground that the assessee failed to satisfy the genuineness of charitable nature of its activities for similar reasons as discussed above for rejecting application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act .
10. We have perused the Ld. CIT(E). The rejection order in respect of the application of the assessee seeking approval under sec 80 G of the Act is the natural corollary of the order of the Ld. CIT(E) of even date rejecting the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. In light of the fact that we have already restored the appeal back to the Ld. CIT(E) Delhi for de novo adjudication in the matter relating to rejection of the application of the assessee for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in ITA No 1467/Del/2025 we, therefore, also remand this matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
11. The assessee is directed to respond to notice(s) issued by the Ld. CIT(E), without fail.
12. In the result, both the impugned orders are set aside and both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos.1467/Del/2025 & 1468/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes.