JAIPUR VIRASAT FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, CIT EXEMPTION

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 556/JPR/2026 (Assessment Year:2026-27) Jaipur Virasat Foundation Vs. CIT Anokhi Farm Village Todi Exemption Ramzanipura Jagatpura, Jaipur �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:AAATJ 3403 C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Sanjeev Mathur, CA Respondent by : Sh. Ananad Swaroop, CIT Date of Hearing 04.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement 10.08.2026 O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta, AM:- The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT (Exemption) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(E)”), dated 13.01.2026 denying grant of approval sought by the assessee under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

P a g e | 2 ITA No.556/JPR/2026 Jaipur Virasat Foundation. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in law as well as on facts in rejecting the application for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without considering the reply submitted by assessee vide its letter dated 26-11- 2025 duly acknowledged by the Income tax department, such action of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is against the principles of natural justice 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that the trust is not registered under RPT Act, 1959 whereas the Assessee is duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and the certificate of registration was submitted vide reply dated 26-11-2025. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground of non-genuine charitable activities whereas the trust submitted the details of activities vide letter dated 26.11.2025 which has not been considered by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) 4. The rejection of application under Section 80G is arbitrary, unjustified and contrary to the provisions of Section 80G(5) read with Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. The Petitioner craves the right to add, alter OR in any way amend the ground of appeal. 3. Order of Ld. CIT(E) reveals that the said approval was denied for the reason that the assessee was found to be not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act 1959 (in short referred to as “RPT”), its activities were not found to be genuine and Form 10AB was noted to be incomplete. The Ld. CIT( E) has noted that in the absence of RPT registration the assessee is not entitled to registration u/s 12AB of the Act, (para 3.6 page 11 of Ld. CIT(E) order).

P a g e | 3 ITA No.556/JPR/2026 Jaipur Virasat Foundation. approval u/s 80G of the Act. Copy of the order of the Ld. CIT(E) granting registration u/s 12A of the Act dated 06.07.2026 for AYs 2027-28 to 2036-37 was filed before us. 5. Considering the fact that the assessee has been granted registration u/s 12AB of the Act, the grant of approval u/s 80 G of the Act can no longer be denied for non registration under RPT Act and on account of non genuine activities since it is only after being satisfied with the fulfillment of the aforesaid conditions that registration u/s 12AB is granted.

P a g e | 4 ITA No.556/JPR/2026 Jaipur Virasat Foundation. 8. In view of the above, considering the registration granted to the assessee u/s 12AB of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) is directed to grant approval u/s 80G to the assessee. 9. The appeal of the assessee is allowed accordingly. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Kuldip Singh) (Annapurna Gupta) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 10.08.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur