https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781522 ITAT held that mere mention of an incorrect section on an 80G application is not a valid ground for rejection where the assessee is otherwise eligible. The tribunal found CIT(E) erred in refusing to condone delay and failing to examine the application on merits or permit rectification; it applied consistent coordinate-bench reasoning that the authority should have allowed correction or treated the application under the appropriate clause. The CIT(E) order was set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration, with direction to afford the assessee an opportunity to rectify and have the application adjudicated on merits. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Nov 2025 08:36:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781522 ITAT held that mere mention of an incorrect section on an 80G application is not a valid ground for rejection where the assessee is otherwise eligible. The tribunal found CIT(E) erred in refusing to condone delay and failing to examine the application on merits or permit rectification; it applied consistent coordinate-bench reasoning that the authority should have allowed correction or treated the application under the appropriate clause. The CIT(E) order was set aside and the matter remitted for reconsideration, with direction to afford the assessee an opportunity to rectify and have the application adjudicated on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781522