BHUWALKA JANAKALYAN TRUST,KOLKATA vs. A.O., WARD 1(2), EXEMPTION, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH AT KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2025-26 Bhuwalka Janakalyan Trust AO, Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata C/o. M/s. Salarpuria Jajodia & Vs. 10B, Middleton Row, Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700072 700071 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAATB5745R Appearances: Assessee represented by : None. Department represented by : Dr. Anup Biswas, CIT, DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 17.08.2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 02.09.2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(E)'] passed in respect of registration u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 22.03.2026. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "1. For that Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application solely on the ground of delay in filing Form 10AB, holding that the time limit prescribed under the ITA No(s). 1609/KOL/2026 first proviso to sec. 80G(5) is mandatory and that it has no power to condone such delay in view of facts and law that such action of Ld. CTT(E) 1S erroneous in law and contrary to binding judicial precedent and it may be held accordingly. 2. For that Ld. CIT(E) has recorded that the appellant was granted provisional approval u/s 80G(5(iv) of the Act in Form No. 10AC vide order dt. 23.9.2021 for the period A.Y 2022-23 to A.Y 2024-25 and the appellant's Form No. 10AB was filed on 29.9.2025 and such rejection is bad in law and it may be held accordingly. 3. For that rejection was made by Ld. CIT(E)only on ground of alleged delay and same is also in violation of principles of natural justice and Ld. CIT(E) may kindly be directed to grant such approval accordingly. 4. For that the appellant respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly set aside the impugned rejection order dt. 22.3.2026 and direct the Ld. CIT(E) to condone the delay and grant approval to the appellant u/s 80G(v)(ii) of the Act after examining the merits of the application having regard to the genuineness of the charitable activities of the Trust as well as regular conduct of charitable activity since earlier years and hence it may be held accordingly. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the appellant wishes to place on record that it is a bona fide charitable trust engaged in activities for the benefit of the general public and has been carrying on its charitable objects since its inception and has been compliant with all regulatory requirements including filing of returns, audit reports, and the relevant forms before the competent authority and hence it may be considered accordingly. 6. For that the provisional approval granted by CPC vide order dt. 23.9.2021 itself recognizes that the Trust fulfilled the initial requirements for approval and there is no finding in the impugned order that the Trust's activities are not genuine or that any condition prescribed w/s 80G(v)i) to (v) is not fulfilled and hence Rejection on a technical ground, without going into the merits, results in the Trust being denied the benefit of 80G exemption and causes grave prejudice to both the Trust and the donors who have contributed in the bona fide belief that thereir donations are eligible for deduction and hence and it may be held accordingly. 7. For that the appellant reserves its right to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing with the leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was granted provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in Form No.-10AC vide order dated 23.03.2021 for the period AY 2022-23 to AY 2024-25. The assessee subsequently filed an application for regular approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act electronically in Form No. 10AB on 29.09.2025. The Ld. CIT(E) observed that the extended due date for filing the application in Form No. 10AB was 30.06.2024 as per CBDT Circular No. 07/2024, and hence, the assessee had failed to file the application within the stipulated time limit. The Ld. CIT(E) held that the time limit prescribed u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act is mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing the application for 80G approval. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee as it was filed beyond time limit. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and, therefore, the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR. The Ld. DR argued that the order of the Ld. CIT(E) may be upheld as the assessee did not file the required application in time before him and the appeal may be dismissed. 6. We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(E). The Bench was of the view that the Ld. CIT(E) had denied the claim of exemption u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act on account of delayed filing of application in Form No. 10AB u/s 80G(5) of the Act by the assessee. In the appeal filed before us, the assessee has mentioned A.Y. 2025-26 only as per the revised Form No. 36. Since the application for final approval was filed on 29.09.2025, in view of sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of the Proviso below clause (ix) of sub-section (5) of section 80G as extracted as under: Provided that the institution or fund referred to in clause (vi) shall make an application in the prescribed form and manner to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, for grant of approval,— (iv) where activities of the institution or fund have–– … (B) commenced at any time after the commencement of such activities and read with clause (c) of the 3rd proviso, which states that provided also that the approval granted under the second proviso shall apply to an institution or fund, where the application is made under— … (c) in any other case, from the assessment year immediately following the financial year in which such application is made as amended w.e.f. 01.10.2024, the approval ought to have been granted at least for A.Y. 2025-26. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it was considered imperative that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity. Hence, the order of the Ld. CIT(E) is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to him for deciding the application afresh after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and seeking the reply from the assessee in respect of the queries raised and in accordance with law. Hence, all the grounds of appeal are partly allowed for statistical purpose. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 2nd September, 2026. [George Mathan] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 02.09.2026 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Bhuwalka Janakalyan Trust. 2. AO, Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. 6. Guard File. //// By order

Deputy