ROTARY DISTRICT WELFARE FUND R.I.D.3131,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS),PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1291/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 July 2026AY 2026-273 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(Exemption)'s order, as the assessee had indeed filed the application under the incorrect clause without possessing the necessary regular approval.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a welfare fund, applied for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The application was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) because it was filed under the wrong clause, as the assessee did not have regular approval.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the application for 80G registration was justified when filed under the wrong clause due to a misunderstanding of the approval process.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A Shah
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT-DR

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [Ld. CIT(E)] rejecting the application u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Submission of Ld. AR:

2.

In this case, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had not received regular approval u/s 80G of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that inadvertently the assessee filed Form 10AB under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had applied for registration u/s 80G of the Act the and the assessee’s application was rejected by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) vide order dated 16.05.2024. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had

ITA No. 1291/PUN/2026 filed an appeal before the ITAT, Pune against the order of the Ld. CIT(Exemption) dated 16.05.2024. The ITAT in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 1490/PUN/2024 vide order dated 26.11.2024 has set aside the order to the Ld. CIT(Exemption) for de-novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(Exemption) has not passed any order to give effect to the order of the ITAT in ITA No. 1490/PUN/2024.

2.1 Therefore, the assessee filed another application u/s 80G(5) of the Act under the impression that now the assessee has to file application presuming that the assessee has received regular approval. The Ld. AR, therefore, submitted that the assessee filed application under the wrong clause.

Submission of Ld. DR: 3. The Ld. DR submitted that there is no mistake in the order of the Ld. CIT(Exemption) as the assessee himself has filed application under wrong clause.

Findings and Analysis:

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, admittedly, the assessee had filed an application under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. During the proceedings, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) asked the assessee to file copy of regular approval in Form No. 10AB. However, the assessee filed copy of provisional approval. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) rejected the assessee’s application as the assessee has filed incorrect application and under wrong clause. In this case, an admitted fact that the assessee filed application under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, though the assessee

ITA No. 1291/PUN/2026

was not having any regular approval, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(Exemption). Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21st July, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 21-07-2026 Ravi Kumar आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →