THIRUMUTTHATH GOPALAN SHAJI KUMAR,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3749/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 July 2026AY 2020-216 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the denial of registration was based on technical grounds and an inadvertent mistake in filing. The CIT(E) should have provided an opportunity to rectify the application.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for renewal of registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G. The CIT(E) rejected the applications without providing a proper opportunity to explain, citing the lack of a prior registration certificate and an incorrect filing clause.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of registration and approval without providing an opportunity to rectify technical errors and inadvertent mistakes is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A(1)(ac)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

Pronounced: 24/07/2026

PER SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These two appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), MUMBAI [“Ld. CIT(E)”] in denying registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G of the Act.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that Ld. CIT(E) issued only one notice dated 27.01.2026 requesting general details for renewal of registration. Ld. Counsel submitted that Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for renewal u/s 12AB and approval u/s 80G of the Act without issuing any further show cause notice and without providing proper opportunity to submit explanations. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the applications without recording any finding or doubting the genuineness of the activities but denied registration and approval on the ground that the assessee had not provided the registration certificate or approval granted prior to 01.04.2021. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the trust was registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act on 20.12.2020 and was formed on 19.09.2020. The trust made an application for registration u/s 12A on 14.04.2021 and provisional registration was granted on 28.05.2021 for the assessment years 2022- 23 to 2026-27. Ld. Counsel further made submissions as under:

“1.1) The learned commissioner of Income tax (exemption) Mumbai in short CIT(E)-Mumbai rejected the application filed in form 10AB i.e. for renewal of Registration made under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of Income tax Act, 1961without giving proper opportunity of hearing the learned CIT(E) Mumbai has rejected the same had violated the principle of equity and justice and proper opportunity. The appellant be given one more opportunity to rectify any inadvertent mistake made by the appellant. 1.2) The learned CIT(E) Mumbai has issued only one standard notice of compliance dated 22/01/2026 to be complied on or before 29/01/2026 out of this three days were non working days i.e. Saturday, Sunday and Monday 26" January 2026 virtually only four days were given to the appellant. The appellant has submitted all available information to the learned CIT(E) Mumbai. 1.3) The Appellant's renewals application for renewal was rejected on 14/03/2026 without issue of show cause notice of rejection. Thus the CIT(E) Mumbai has not given proper opportunity to the appellant in such circumstances order dated 14/03/2026 be declared invalid.

1.4) The learned CIT(E) Mumbai has given reasons for rejection of renewals that the appellant had made for provisional registration in form no. 10A made on 14/04/2021(i.e. in the corona 19 period) by consultant available Junior Clerks all seniors were not allowed to attend the work. 1.5) The appellant's Junior tax consultants has wrongly filed up column for provisional registration u/s 12A(1) (ac) (ii). The correct column and clause is u/s 12A(1) (ac)(vi). The date of incorporation was mention in appropriate column as 19% September 2020. Thus facts were on records of the Income tax act, 1961. This mistake ought to have pointed out at that time now appellant be allowed to rectify the mistakes by filing the appropriate forms and columns as directed by the learned CIT(E) Mumbai2.1) The learned CIT (E) Mumbai be directed to guide the appellant (as per CBDT circular). The Income tax Officers are friends and guide of the tax payer, the Assessee. 2.2) The learned CIT(E) Mumbai be directed /to rectify the mistake committed by the appellant's Junior tax consultant in Corona -19 time (when provisional application were made in form 10A on 14/04/2021) i.e. by filing another forms/ forms with request to Condon the delay and mistake and the appellant be granted renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of Income tax Act, 1961. 3.1) The Appellant humbly pray that the appellant be granted proper opportunity to rectify the mistake committed in (Corona 19 times) and lapse and inadvertent mistake committed be condoned and renewal of the trust be granted. 3.2) The learned CIT (exemption) Mumbai has not doubted (a) the genuineness of activities of the trust the compliance of such requirement of any other laws for the time being in force by the trust as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. (i.e. as per se. 12AB(4) as per explanation there is no specified violation by the trust). 3.3) The renewals of registration of the trust should not be rejected on technical grounds without giving proper opportunity to rectify the same.” 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the assessee did not provide a copy of registration certificate prior to 01.04.2021 and also did not apply for registration under the appropriate clause, the Ld. CIT(E) denied registration without calling for any further explanation from the assessee or providing an opportunity.

4.

Heard rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(E), it is noticed that registration u/s 12AB was denied on the ground that the assessee did not provide a copy of the registration certificate granted prior to 01.04.2021. Since the assessee failed to furnish such a registration certificate, registration was denied. We observe that the trust came into existence only on 19.09.2020 and applied for registration u/s 12AB for the first time on 14.04.2021 and applied for approval u/s 80G on 31.05.2021 and therefore, the question of filing a copy of registration certificate granted prior to 01.04.2021 does not arise.

5.

The second contention of the Ld. CIT(E) was that the assessee applied for registration u/s 12AB under sub-clause (i) of clause (ac) of section 12A(1) of the Act, whereas the said provision applies only to those trusts which were already registered u/s 12AA prior to 01.04.2021. The Ld. CIT(E) observed that since the assessee did not furnish a copy of registration granted prior to 01.04.2021, the application for registration was liable to be rejected.

6.

We are of the view that since the assessee was formed on 19.09.2020 and applied for registration for the first time on 14.04.2021, filing the application under sub-clause (i) of clause (ac) of section 12A(1) of the Act by the assessee is only a technical breach or an inadvertent mistake. Therefore, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have given an opportunity to the Assessee to correct the application furnished by it. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we restore these two appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) who shall consider the applications of the assessee under the appropriate clause or give an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the applications and decide the same afresh after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24/07/2026

Sd/- Sd/- MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 24/07/2026 Prabhat Copy to: URBAN CENTER TRUST, 2/203,YASHODHAN APARTMENTS FOUR 1 BUNGLOWS, ANDHERI (WEST), MUMBAI-400053, MAHARASHTRA CIT(EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, ROOM NO.601, 6TH FLOOR CUMBALLA 2 HILL, MTNL BUILDING, PEDDAR ROAD, MUMBAI, MUMBAI - 400026, MAHARASHTRA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →