SMT NEELADEVI SURAJMAL BOTHRA CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY () Assessment Year: 2024-25
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 26.06.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(E)’] wherein he has rejected the application of the assessee for seeking approval u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The grounds raised by the assessee is reproduced as under:
In the fact leaned CIT (E 80G[5] of ITA just because instead of ren an opportunit 3. Briefly stated, t granted provisional 04.04.2022, which re 25, and had been a 80G(5)(iii) of the Inc ‘the Act’). As per application for regula however, filed its registration under s clause (iv) in place o During the pendenc rectify the mistake by Learned Commission however, considered rejected the same pri order, the Ld. CIT(E) evidence substantiat under clauses (i) to (v 4. We have considere the material available Smt. Nee ITA ts and circumstances of the case and (Exemption) erred in not granting regis A, 1961, and rejecting the Application fo a wrong option of fresh certificate wa newal of the said certificate that too witho ty rectify the clerical error. the facts of the case are that th l registration in Form No. emained valid up to the Assessm availing the benefit thereof in t come-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter law, the assessee was requi ar registration by October, 2022 application belatedly on 0 section 80G(5), but inadverte of clause (iii) of sub-section (5) cy of this application, the asse y filing another application on 1 ner of Income Tax (Exemptions d only the application dated 1 imarily on the ground of delay. I ) also recorded that the assesse ting genuineness of its activitie v) of section 80G(5) of the Act. ed the rival submissions and ca e on record. It is not in dispute eladevi Surajmal Bothra Charitable Trust 2 A No. 4471/MUM/2025 in law, the tration u/s or the same as selected out granting he assessee was . 10AC dated ment Year 2024– terms of section r referred to as ired to file an 2. The assessee, 02.05.2024 for ntly mentioned of section 80G. essee sought to 17.12.2024. The s) [‘Ld. CIT(E)’], 17.12.2024 and In the impugned ee had not filed es as envisaged arefully perused that the Central
Board of Direct Ta extended the time pe under clause (iii) of t
30.06.2024. In the p on 02.05.2024, whi limitation. The subs considered view, wa continuation of the a the solitary purpose conclusion drawn by was belated cannot b
5. The law is well set with the power to gra exercised in accorda substance of the mat clerical error in ci substantive right, pa within the extended otherwise valid applic denial of justice and requirements are in cause of justice.
Smt. Nee
ITA axes (CBDT), vide letter date eriod for filing applications in the first proviso to section 80G( present case, the assessee filed ich was well within the exte sequent application dated 17.1
as only in the nature of a application originally filed on 0
of correction of clause number y the Ld. CIT(E) that the assess be sustained in law.
ttled that where a statutory aut ant or refuse registration, such nce with the statute and havin tter rather than the form of app iting the relevant clause ca articularly when the application time prescribed by CBDT. The cation on a hyper-technical grou runs contrary to the principle tended to advance, and not t eladevi Surajmal Bothra
Charitable Trust
3
A No. 4471/MUM/2025
ed 25.04.2024,
Form No. 10AB
(5) of the Act till d its application nded period of 12.2024, in our rectification or 2.05.2024, with r. Therefore, the see’s application thority is vested power has to be ng regard to the plication. A mere annot defeat a n itself was filed e rejection of an und amounts to that procedural to obstruct, the 6. We accordingly ho with its rectification requires to be consid
CIT(E) is therefore se
Ld. CIT(E) with a dire approval under se opportunity to the genuineness of its ac
Act, and to decide the 7. In the result, the statistical purposes i
8. In the result, statistical purposes.
Order pronoun (NARENDER KUMA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 17/09/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Smt. Nee
ITA old that the application dated 0
n dated 17.12.2024, is within dered on merits. The impugned et aside. The matter is restored ection to consider the assessee’s ection 80G(5) afresh, after assessee to furnish evidence ctivities in terms of section 80G( e same strictly in accordance wi ground raised by the assesse n the manner indicated above.”
the appeal of the assessee ced in the open Court on 17/0
d/-
S
AR CHOUDHRY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA eladevi Surajmal Bothra
Charitable Trust
4
A No. 4471/MUM/2025
2.05.2024, read limitation and order of the Ld.
to the file of the s application for affording due in support of (5)(i) to (v) of the ith law.
e is allowed for is allowed for 09/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
Smt. Nee
ITA ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu eladevi Surajmal Bothra
Charitable Trust
5
A No. 4471/MUM/2025
R, gistrar) umbai