<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Registration as a religious trust without disclosed material and hearing was set aside, with 12AB and 80G issues remanded.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98289</link>
    <description>Delay of 262 days in filing the appeals was condoned on the ground that the assessee discovered only later that its registration had been treated as that of a religious trust, which affected its 80G recognition. On merits, the Tribunal found the registration under section 12AB and the consequential rejection of approval under section 80G(5) unsustainable because the Commissioner had not disclosed the material relied on, had not confronted the assessee, and had not given an effective opportunity of hearing. The matters were restored for fresh adjudication after examination of the material and a reasoned decision on whether the trust was educational rather than religious.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:09 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Registration as a religious trust without disclosed material and hearing was set aside, with 12AB and 80G issues remanded.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98289</link>
      <description>Delay of 262 days in filing the appeals was condoned on the ground that the assessee discovered only later that its registration had been treated as that of a religious trust, which affected its 80G recognition. On merits, the Tribunal found the registration under section 12AB and the consequential rejection of approval under section 80G(5) unsustainable because the Commissioner had not disclosed the material relied on, had not confronted the assessee, and had not given an effective opportunity of hearing. The matters were restored for fresh adjudication after examination of the material and a reasoned decision on whether the trust was educational rather than religious.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:09 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>