ANJUMAN E HYDERIA ASNA ASHARI KASHMIRI TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4776/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 September 2025Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that while the assessee had complied with other requirements, the condonation of delay was not adequately addressed before the Ld. CIT(E), and new medical evidence was submitted during the appeal. Recognizing the Ld. CIT(E)'s jurisdiction to condone delays, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Ld. CIT(E) for reconsideration of the assessee's application, directing a lenient approach and a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a religious charitable trust, was granted provisional registration but failed to file the application for regularization under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) within the statutory six-month period, leading to a delay of 29 months. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application on grounds of limitation due to this delay, prompting the assessee to file an appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the application for regularization of provisional registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, can be condoned by the Ld. CIT(E) considering the trustee's ill health and a relevant CBDT circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh & Shri S.A.Kanji
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR)
Hearing: 11/09/2025Pronounced: 16/09/2025

The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(E)] passed under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act), date of order 25/06/2025.

Anjuman E Hyderia Asna Ashari Kashmiri Trust 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a religious charitable trust registered with Charity Commissioner dated 30/01/2017 vide No. E 32907. The assessee was granted the provisional registration on 31/12/2021 for the period A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2024-25. To regularise the said registration, the assessee was liable to submit the forms as per provisions of section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act “at least six months prior to expiry of period of provisional registration or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier”. So, the assessee was liable to file by the end of June, 2022 whereas the form for regularisation of provisional registration filed on 11/11/2024 i.e. delay of 29 months. The Ld. CIT(E) decided that due to the said delay, the assessee’s application is not acceptable. So, the Ld. CIT(E) asked some clarification and accordingly, replied the same but the Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee on the ground of limitation for delay in filing the form for registration. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us.

3.

The Ld. AR submitted that the delay in filing the application for registration occurred due to the ill health of the trustee, who was responsible for handling the affairs of the trust. An affidavit duly affirmed on 04/09/2025 by Mr. Naseer Ahmed Alamgir, the trustee, was placed on record in support of this contention. The Ld. AR further relied on CBDT Circular No. 7 of 2024 dated 25th April 2024, wherein the Board extended the due date for filing Forms 10A and 10B under the Act, considering the practical difficulties faced by taxpayers and stakeholders. Although the circular may not be directly applicable to the present case, the Ld. AR contended that its spirit, read with the jurisdiction vested in the Ld. CIT(E), clearly empowers the authority to condone the delay in filing the impugned application for regularization of provisional registration.

4.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the revenue authorities.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the documents available on record. It is noted that during the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee had already complied with the requirements on merits. However, the aspect of delay in filing the application was not adequately addressed before the Ld. CIT(E). Having regard to the above-mentioned circular, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(E) is vested with the jurisdiction to condone such delay. It is further observed that the assessee had not filed any affidavit before the Ld. CIT(E) for explaining the delay. The affidavit supported by medical documents has now been placed before us. In these circumstances, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for reconsideration of the assessee’s application in light of the affidavit and medical evidence. The assessee is directed to submit the said affidavit and supporting documents before the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) is further directed to decide the issue of condonation of delay in a lenient manner, after granting the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →