SMT BRIJMALA JAIN CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION MUMBAI, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the absence of an irrevocability clause alone is not a sufficient ground to deny registration, especially when the trust deed has since been amended to include it. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a public charitable trust, applied for renewal of registration under section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application because the trust deed lacked an irrevocability/dissolution clause.
What were the issues?
Whether the absence of an irrevocability clause in the trust deed at the time of application is a valid ground for rejection of registration renewal. Whether a subsequent amendment to the trust deed can cure this deficiency.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI JAGADISH
Per: SHRI JAGADISH, A.M.:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.02.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as "the Ld. CIT(E)"] rejecting the assessee's application for renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. The effective grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for renewal of registration under section 12AB
ITA No.2920/M/2026 Smt Brijmala Jain Charitable Trust
of the Act merely on the ground that the trust deed did not contain an irrevocability/dissolution clause, without appreciating the facts of the case and the settled legal position. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust. It filed Form No.10AB seeking renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Act. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) noticed that the trust deed did not contain an irrevocability or dissolution clause. According to him, the said deficiency constituted a violation falling within Explanation (g) to section 12AB(4) of the Act. Accordingly, the application filed by the assessee for renewal of registration was rejected. 4. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that the trust has subsequently amended the trust deed and incorporated the requisite dissolution clause. It was, therefore, submitted that in view of the subsequent amendment to the trust deed, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. 5. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the impugned order and submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has passed the order on the basis of the trust deed as it existed on the date of consideration of the application. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the sole reason assigned by the Ld. CIT(E) for rejecting the assessee's application is the absence of an irrevocability/dissolution clause in the trust deed. Before us, the assessee has submitted that the said deficiency has already been cured by suitably amending the trust deed and incorporating the requisite clause. 7. We further find that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of The Chamber of Tax Consultants & Ors. (supra), [2026] 184 2
ITA No.2920/M/2026 Smt Brijmala Jain Charitable Trust
taxmann.com 374 (Bom.) has held that registration cannot be denied merely for absence of an irrevocability clause in the trust deed. The legal position explained by the Hon'ble High Court has a direct bearing on the issue involved in the present appeal. 8. In our considered opinion, the subsequent amendment to the trust deed as well as the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court require examination by the Ld. CIT(E). 9. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the assessee's application afresh after taking into account the amended trust deed and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in The Chamber of Tax Consultants & Ors. (supra). The Ld. CIT(E) shall afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing a speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all documents and explanations as may be required during the course of fresh proceedings. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20/07/2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (JAGADISH) Judicial Member Accountant Member
Mumbai, Dated: 20/07/2026 Ashwani Rao Sr. Private Secretary
ITA No.2920/M/2026 Smt Brijmala Jain Charitable Trust
Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (Appeals) 5. The DR, I.T.A.T. By order
(Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai
More judgments on Section 12AB
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 592/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
- Shri Brajshiromani Laxmandas Sewa Trust… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura…ITA 591/AGR/2026[2026-2027]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2026-2027
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026