SHRI KRISHAN GOUSHALA SEVA SAMITI ROL,NAGAUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

At the outset, the Registry has pointed out a delay of 272 days in filing each of the present appeals. The assessee has filed a detailed petition under section 253(5) of the Act seeking condonation of the said delay. In the condonation petition, the assessee has stated that it is a small charitable trust running a Gaushala in Village Rol, District Nagaur, Rajasthan, with the object of providing shelter, protection and care to abandoned, old, sick and helpless cows. The affairs of the assessee are stated to be managed by villagers and social workers who are not highly educated and are not conversant with the technical provisions of the Act or the online compliance mechanism of the Income-tax Department. It has further been explained that the assessee was entirely dependent upon its local tax consultant for compliance with the statutory requirements and remained under a bona fide belief that

The assessee has further stated that its office-bearers were unaware of the adverse orders passed by the learned CIT(E) and came to know about the rejection of registration only when the officials of the Income-tax Department informed them that, consequent upon the rejection of registration under section 12AB, an assessment had been completed and a substantial tax demand had been raised against the assessee. It has been stated that immediately upon becoming aware of the adverse orders and their consequences, the office-bearers contacted the Department and obtained legal advice. Thereafter, the assessee approached counsel at Jodhpur, collected the relevant records and documents and took prompt steps for filing the present appeals. It has accordingly been pleaded that the delay occurred due to bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and that there was

The learned Authorised Representative reiterated the reasons stated in the condonation petition and submitted that the assessee had not derived any advantage by filing the appeals belatedly. He, therefore, prayed that a liberal and justice-oriented approach be adopted and the delay be condoned.

We have considered the explanation furnished by the assessee. Having regard to the nature of the assessee’s activities, the background of its office-bearers, its stated dependence upon the local consultant, the non-communication of the adverse orders and the prompt action taken after acquiring knowledge thereof, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeals within the prescribed period. No mala fide conduct or deliberate inaction is discernible from the material placed before us. We, therefore, condone the delay of 272 days in filing each of the appeals and admit both the appeals for adjudication on merits.

The learned CIT(E) observed, in brief, that the assessee was not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and had not furnished complete details and supporting evidence to establish the genuineness of its activities. The learned CIT(E) also recorded non- compliance with the show-cause notice and cancelled the provisional registration dated 20.08.2022.

The assessee had also filed an application in Form No. 10AB on 30.09.2023 seeking approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. The

The application under section 80G was rejected, inter alia, on the ground that registration under section 12AB had been denied. The learned CIT(E) further held that the application for regular approval had not been filed within the time prescribed under clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5), having regard to the commencement of activities, and recorded cancellation of the provisional approval dated 20.08.2022.

Aggrieved by the orders of learned CIT(E), the assessee is in appeals before us.

Before us, the learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee has subsequently obtained registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on 17.07.2025. It was submitted that this registration was not available before the learned CIT(E) when the impugned orders were passed. 14. The learned AR further submitted that, for the reasons explained in the condonation petition, the office-bearers of the assessee remained unaware of the proceedings and the assessee could not furnish proper

The learned AR, therefore, requested that one more effective opportunity be granted to the assessee and that both matters, namely, the application for registration under section 12AB and the application for approval under section 80G, be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the impugned orders. He, however, raised no objection to the prayer of the assessee for restoration of both the matters to the file of the learned CIT(E).

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The application for registration under section 12AB was rejected primarily on the grounds that the assessee was not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, the genuineness of its activities could not be verified and the requisite details and documents were not furnished.

We also find that the learned CIT(E) had called for several details concerning the cattle-tag register, donor particulars, Government grants, bills and vouchers, bank transactions, salary payments, construction expenditure and payments to persons specified under section 13(3) of the Act. Admittedly, the complete details were not furnished before the learned CIT(E). The learned Authorised Representative has attributed such non-compliance to the circumstances explained in the condonation petition and has undertaken to furnish all the requisite documents and explanations if one more opportunity is granted.

Considering the subsequent registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, the explanation furnished for the earlier non- compliance and the concurrence of both parties regarding restoration, we are of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met by

We, accordingly, set aside the order dated 22.03.2024 and restore the application for registration under section 12AB to the file of the learned CIT(E). The learned CIT(E) shall examine the registration certificate dated 17.07.2025 issued under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and all other documents, books of account, evidence and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee and shall decide the application afresh in accordance with law.

Since the aforesaid order also records cancellation of the provisional registration dated 20.08.2022, the said aspect shall also be examined and decided afresh by the learned CIT(E) in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions and after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Insofar as the application under section 80G is concerned, one of the principal grounds for its rejection was the denial of registration under section 12AB. Since the application under section 12AB has been restored for fresh adjudication, the application under section 80G also requires reconsideration.

In the present case, the impugned order was passed on 22.03.2024, prior to the issuance of Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024. The effect and applicability of the said Circular, as well as the above judicial precedents, were therefore not available for consideration before the learned CIT(E). Since the application was filed on 30.09.2023, which is prior to the extended date of 30.06.2024, and the assessee has also sought

We, therefore, set aside the order dated 22.03.2024 and restore the application for approval under section 80G to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The learned CIT(E) shall decide the said application consequent upon, or simultaneously with, the fresh adjudication of the application under section 12AB.

Since the order concerning section 80G also records cancellation of the provisional approval dated 20.08.2022, the learned CIT(E) shall examine and decide the said issue afresh in accordance with law.

Needless to state, the learned CIT(E) shall afford a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall pass reasoned and speaking orders. The assessee is directed to furnish all the

In view of the restoration of both matters, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the assessee’s eligibility for registration under section 12AB or approval under section 80G. All the issues are left open for fresh adjudication by the learned CIT(E).

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