BHUMI FOUNDATION WAGHOLI,WAGHOLI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 11 days in filing these appeals before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the filed the affidavit of the assessee for condonation of delay explaining the sufficient cause. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a public charitable trust and is undertaking charitable activities. The assessee was granted provisional registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi) and u/s. 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in form no.10AC on 9.01.2022. Subsequently, as per the amended, provisions of section 12AB & u/sec80G of the Act, The assessee for the purpose of permanent registration has uploaded separate e-applications in Form.No.10AB on 05.08.2025.Whereas the office of the CIT (Exemption) has issued notice for the clarifications and information and the assessee has duly complied with the details. Whereas the CIT (Exemption) observed that wrong code was mentioned i.e u/sec12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act instead of u/sec12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. Similarly the CIT(Exemption) find that the assessee has wrongly mentioned the code i.e under section 80G(5)(ii) instead of under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act and has rejected the both applications vide order dated 13.02.2026. Aggrieved by the CIT (Exemption) orders, the assessee has filed the appeals before Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing Ld. AR submitted that CIT (Exemption) erred in rejecting the assessee’s applications u/sec12A of the Act and U/sec 80G of the Act ignoring the submissions made along with the application in Form.No.10AB and also additional submissions and information filed in compliance to the notices issued. The Learned AR further submitted that the nature of activities are charitable in nature and the CIT (Exemption) has rejected the application in mechanical manner without examining the genuineness of activities and substantive merits. Further the learned AR emphasized that assessee has a good case on merits and prayed for an opportunity before the lower authorities to substantiate the claim. Per Contra Ld DR relied on the order of the CIT (Exemption). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has filed application before the CIT (Exemption) for registration u/sec12A of the Act and approval under section 80G of the act. Whereas the assessee in the course of hearing has filed details in compliance to the notices issued by the CIT (Exemption) , The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has by mistake mentioned incorrect code u/sec12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act instead of u/sec12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act and similarly, in the approval application u/sec80Gof the Act ,the incorrect code was mentioned i.e under section 80G(5)(ii) instead of under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act in the application The Learned AR further submitted that the nature of activities are charitable in nature and the CIT (Exemption) has rejected the application in mechanical manner without examining the genuineness of activities and substantive merits and the Ld.AR prayed for an opportunity to substantiate claim before the lower authorities. We consider the facts, submissions and principle of natural justice and shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case along with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT (Exemption) to de novo consider the application as per the law and we allow the ground of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.

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