INDIAN SOCIETY OF CLEFT LIP PALATE AND CRANIOFACIAL ANOMALIES,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6730/MUM/2026Status: HeardITAT Mumbai17 September 2026AY 2026-274 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) should not have dismissed the applications based on clerical errors. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) to decide the applications on merits after rectifying any mentioned errors.

What were the facts?

The assessee's applications for approval under Section 80G and registration under Section 12A were rejected by the CIT(E) due to clerical errors in mentioning the relevant sections/clauses. The CIT(E) mistakenly treated the Section 12A application as a Section 80G application and rejected both based on this confusion.

What were the issues?

Whether rejection of applications for Section 80G approval and Section 12A registration based on clerical errors in mentioning sections/clauses is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80G(5),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI JAGADISH

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeals preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(E)”] dated 29.03.2026 for assessment year 2026-27.

2.

Vide ITA No.6730/Mum/2026, the assessee has agitated the action of the Ld.CIT(E) for rejecting the application of the assessee for approval u/s.80G of

ITA Nos. 6730 & 6731/MUM/2026 INDIAN SOCIETY OF CLEFT LIP PALATE & CRANIOFACIAL ANOMALIES the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] noting that the assessee filed application by mentioning wrong section. He observed that the assessee was supposed to file application for renewal of approval under clause (ii) to first proviso of Section 80G(5) of the Act, but the assessee applied under clause (iii) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act. Vide ITA No.6731/Mum/2026, the assessee has agitated the action of the Ld.CIT(E) in rejecting the application for renewal of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act observing that since the assessee’s application for renewal of registration u/s.12A stood rejected and therefore, the assessee is not entitled for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act.

3.

We have heard rival submissions and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that in fact, the assessee had applied for renewal of registration u/s.12A of the Act and at the same time, by way of separate application for approval u/s.80G of the Act. However, the Ld.CIT(E) mistook the application for registration u/s.12A of the Act as an application for renewal of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act and dismissed the same stating that a wrong section/clause has been mentioned in the application. Thereafter, the Ld.CIT(E) dismissed the application of the assessee for renewal of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act stating that since he has dismissed the application for renewal of registration u/s.12A of the Act, hence the application u/s.80G(5) of the Act was also liable to be dismissed. We note that a lot of confusion/misunderstanding have been occurred not only among the

ITA Nos. 6730 & 6731/MUM/2026 INDIAN SOCIETY OF CLEFT LIP PALATE & CRANIOFACIAL ANOMALIES tax practitioners, but also among the Income Tax authorities relating to the interpretation of the newly amended provisions of Section 12A & Section 80G(5) of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Taking note of the aforesaid confusion and also certain ambiguities, in the prescribed performa for issuing certificates of registration/approval, the CBDT has issued clarifications from time to time and has also extended time limit for making such application. The Ld.CIT(E), in this case, well aware of the fact that the assessee had applied for renewal of registration u/s.12A of the Act and for renewal of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act. He was not supposed to dismiss the application on account of clerical error in mentioning the relevant clause rather, he was supposed to consider the application of the assessee under the relevant clause and decide the same in accordance with law. It is pertinent to mention here that even the Ld.CIT(E), himself, has committed a mistake while treating the application moved by the assessee u/s.12A of the Act as an application u/s.80G(5) of the Act. We therefore set aside the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(E) in both the appeals and restore the matter to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on the applications of the assessee u/s.12A of the Act and u/s.80G(5) of the Act, by treating the same as has been moved for renewal of registration/renewal of approval as the case may be irrespective of the fact that any wrong clause or section has been mentioned by the assessee. He may at the same time get it rectified by taking an application in this respect from the assessee and thereafter

ITA Nos. 6730 & 6731/MUM/2026 INDIAN SOCIETY OF CLEFT LIP PALATE & CRANIOFACIAL ANOMALIES

to decide both the applications on merits. The Ld.CIT(E) will decide both the applications within three months from the receipt of the copy of this order.

4.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.09.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH ) (SANJAY GARG ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 17.09.2026 Copy to: INDIAN SOCIETY OF CLEFT LIP PALATE & CRANIOFACIAL ANOMALIES, 2ND FLOOR, 14-A SNEH SADAN, 1 MANGALWADI GIRGAUM, 400004, MURTIJAPUR-400004, MAHARASHTRA CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, ROOM NO. 601, 6TH FLOOR, MTNL, TEL. EX. 2 BUILDING, CUMBALLA HILLS, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI. 400026, MUMBAI-400026, MAHARASHTRA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →