VIVEKANANDA VILLAGE VIDHYALAYAS,CHENNAI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1961/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 August 2026AY 2026-20275 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) rejected the applications without properly appreciating the facts and materials. The requirement to produce a pre-01.04.2021 registration was impossible as the trust was formed in December 2022.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected these applications for failure to comply with notices and provide mandatory documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications for registration and approval without considering the assessee's specific circumstances and submitted documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A(1)(ac)(i),Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 119(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 03.08.2026Pronounced: 05.08.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai both dated 29.03.2026, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’).

- 2 - ITA No.1960 & 1961/CHNY/2026 Vivekanand Village Vidhyalas 2. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(E) has rejected the applications filed by the assessee seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act and approval u/s.80G of the Act, by holding that the assessee has failed to comply with the notices and has not furnished the mandatory documents required for examining the objects and genuineness of the activities.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(E) rejecting the assessee's application for registration under section 12AB of the Act and approval under section 80G of the Act, the assessee has filed the present appeals before the Tribunal. Before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite several opportunities. However, it is stated in the statement of facts and the grounds of appeal that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for regular registration under section 12AB by invoking the provisions of section 12A(1)(ac)(i), whereas the assessee had correctly filed the application under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) pursuant to the provisional registration granted in Form No.10AC. It is further stated that the trust was constituted only in December, 2022 and, therefore, the requirement imposed by the CIT(E) to furnish a registration certificate issued prior to 01.04.2021 was factually impossible and legally untenable. It is the further case of the assessee that the CIT(E) failed to consider the documents evidencing the genuineness of the trust's activities, other compliance documents and

- 3 - ITA No.1960 & 1961/CHNY/2026 Vivekanand Village Vidhyalas the application filed under section 119(2)(b) seeking condonation before passing the impugned order. Therefore, according to the assessee, the rejection of approval u/s.80G of the Act, being merely consequential to the rejection of u/s.12AB of the Act, is also unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside.

4.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We find that the CIT(E) rejected the assessee's application for regular registration u/s.12AB of the Act on the ground that the assessee had not furnished a copy of registration u/s.12A/12AA obtained under old regime i.e., prior to 01.04.2021. However, the specific contention of the assessee is that the trust came into existence only in December, 2022 and had already been granted provisional registration in Form No.10AC. Therefore, the application for regular registration was rightly filed u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. In such circumstances, the requirement imposed by the CIT(E) to produce a registration certificate issued prior to 01.04.2021 appears to be factually impossible and, therefore, warrants fresh consideration. We further find that the assessee has specifically contended that it had furnished all the relevant documents evidencing the objects and genuineness of its activities, along with an application u/s.119(2)(b) seeking condonation of delay. However, the impugned order does not disclose any discussion or examination of the said documents. Thus, in

- 4 - ITA No.1960 & 1961/CHNY/2026 Vivekanand Village Vidhyalas our considered opinion, the CIT(E) has rejected the applications without properly appreciating the relevant facts and materials placed on record. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the applications, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned orders of the CIT(E) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to consider the applications for registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Act afresh, in accordance with law. The CIT(E) shall examine all the documents and evidences to be furnished by the assessee and shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to extend full co-operation, furnish all the requisite details and evidences as may be called for by the CIT(E), and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 5th August, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (प�मावती एस) (PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 5th August, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS

- 5 - ITA No.1960 & 1961/CHNY/2026 Vivekanand Village Vidhyalas आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Chennai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.08.06 15:44:50 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →