RAMJIWAI SATSANG TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

Brief facts are that the assessee is an old charitable trust carrying on charitable activities. It had earlier been granted registration under section 12AB(1)(b) vide order in Form No.10AD dated 29.12.2024, bearing Unique Registration No. AAATR4531P24MB01, which was expressly made operative for the assessment years 2022–23 to 2026–27. Thus, on the date when the present applications were considered, the assessee was already holding a regular and subsisting registration under section 12AB, valid up to the assessment year 2026–27.

The learned CIT (Exemption), however, proceeded on the footing that the assessee was merely holding a provisional registration for the assessment years 2022–23 to 2024–25 and that the application in Form No.10AB ought to have been filed on or before 30.09.2023, which date was subsequently extended by CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 up

Before us, the learned counsel submitted that the very foundation of the impugned orders is factually erroneous, because the learned CIT (Exemption) has treated the assessee’s registration as provisional while completely overlooking the subsequent regular registration granted under section 12AB(1)(b), which remained valid up to the assessment year 2026–27. It was further submitted that, in response to the detailed show-cause notice dated 09.01.2026, the assessee had furnished a comprehensive reply along with the existing registration certificate, details of its charitable activities, supporting documentary evidence and other information called for by the learned CIT (Exemption). The learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the impugned orders.

We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the material placed on record. The regular registration certificate dated 29.12.2024 unequivocally records that registration under section 12AB(1)(b) had been granted to the assessee for the assessment years 2022–23 to 2026–27.

It is also evident that, pursuant to the show-cause notice, the assessee had filed a detailed reply before the learned CIT (Exemption) and had furnished the existing registration certificate as well as the particulars and supporting documents concerning the nature and genuineness of its charitable activities. Nothing has been brought on record in the impugned orders to suggest that the objects of the trust are not charitable, that its activities are not genuine, or that the activities are being carried on contrary to its stated objects. In fact, the impugned orders do not contain any adverse finding whatsoever on the objects or genuineness of the activities of the assessee. The rejection rests solely upon an erroneous assumption that the assessee continued to hold only a provisional registration and that its application was consequently time-barred.

Accordingly, the order passed in relation to registration under section 12AB is set aside and the learned CIT (Exemption) is directed to grant registration to the assessee under section 12AB for the applicable statutory period. Since the rejection of approval under section 80G(5) is founded on the same reasoning and is consequential to the rejection of registration under section 12AB, the said order is also set aside. The learned CIT (Exemption) is consequently directed to grant approval under section 80G(5) to the assessee for the applicable statutory period, in accordance with law.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.