SHRI ANDHERI KVO SEVA SAMAJ,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, EXEM. WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM:

These two appeals preferred by the assessee arise from two separate orders, both dated 29.11.2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“CIT(E)”], in Form No. 10AD. Since the issues arising in the two appeals are interconnected, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. ITA No. 1252/Mum/2026 is directed against the order dated 29.11.2025, whereby the

2 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj application in Form No. 10AB filed by the assessee on 25.04.2025, seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”], was rejected on the ground that the application had been filed under an incorrect provision, namely, section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. ITA No. 1324/Mum/2026 is directed against the order dated 29.11.2025, passed by the learned CIT(E), whereby the application in Form No. 10AB filed by the assessee on 29.09.2025, seeking approval under section 80G of the Act under clause (iv)-B of the first proviso to section 80G(5), was rejected. The rejection was founded on the rejection of the assessee’s application for registration under section 12AB of the Act.

Condonation of Delay 2. At the outset, it is noticed that ITA No. 1252/Mum/2026 and ITA No. 1324/Mum/2026 have been filed with a delay of three days and five days, respectively. The assessee has filed separate petitions seeking condonation of the delay, duly supported by affidavits of its trustee. It has been explained that the concerned trustee was out of Mumbai from 20.01.2026 to 02.02.2026 owing to unavoidable personal and social commitments and, consequently, the appeal documents, authorisations and verification forms could not be executed within the prescribed period.

3 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj furnished by the assessee and the short duration of the delay, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeals within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay in filing both the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.

Facts in brief 4. The assessee is a charitable trust which was registered under section 12A of the Act, under the erstwhile regime vide Registration No. TR/24336 and was also granted approval under section 80G vide Order No. DIT(E)/MC/80G/2875/2007/2007-08.

4.1 The assessee filed Form No. 10A on 28.03.2025 under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act and was granted provisional registration in Form No. 10AC on 04.04.2025 for A.Ys. 2025-26 to 2027-28. Thereafter, the assessee filed Form No. 10AB on 25.04.2025 seeking registration under section 12AB with effect from A.Y. 2022- 23. The application was filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The learned CIT(E) was of the view that the assessee, being an institution registered under the erstwhile regime prior to 01.04.2021, ought to have filed Form No. 10A under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act. The learned CIT(E), therefore, rejected the application by order dated 29.11.2025, on the ground that the application had been filed under an incorrect provision. The learned CIT(E), however, observed that the assessee was at liberty

4 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj to file the appropriate Form No. 10A along with a petition seeking condonation of delay.

4.2 The assessee had also filed Form No. 10AB on 29.09.2025 seeking approval under section 80G of the Act. The learned CIT(E) observed that the assessee’s application for registration under section 12AB had already been rejected and, therefore, the condition prescribed under section 80G(5)(i) was not fulfilled. Consequently, the application for approval under section 80G was rejected by a separate order dated 29.11.2025

Grounds in ITA No. 1252/Mum/2026 Ground 1: Erroneous Rejection on Technical/Procedural Grounds The learned CIT (E) erred in not granting registration with effect from A.Y. 2022-23. Emphasis on “vested right” concept + forfeiture principle: 1. The CIT(E) rejected the application on the sole ground that Form 10AB was filed under an incorrect section code [Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) instead of 12A(1)(ac)(i)].

5 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj 3. Mere procedural/clerical errors should not result in forfeiture of vested rights where the genuine charitable nature and objects remain undisputed.

Relief Sought: Direction to consider the substance of the application rather than rejecting it on a curable technical defect Ground 2: Failure to Apply "Substance over Form" Doctrine Misapplication of form-based rejection contrary to established ITAT jurisprudence: 1. The doctrine of "substance over form" is well-established in tax jurisprudence, particularly in section 12A registrations.

a. Indian Trust Act provisions b. Section 12A(1)(ac) legislative intent c. Principles of proportionality in administrative action

Relief Sought: Direction to apply the substance over form doctrine and evaluate the trust's actual charitable objects and activities. Ground 3: Non-consideration of Technical Glitches on E-filing Portal Force majeure/systemic constraints not considered in the filing delay: 1. The appropriate Form 10A could not be filed during the last week of April 2025 due to systemic restrictions on the e-filing portal.

6 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj 2. The appellant, acting in good faith and maintaining bona fide compliance, filed Form 10AB as an alternative to preserve the filing and prevent default.

Relief Sought: Direction to treat the alternative filing as valid and to apply appropriate condonation provisions. Ground 4: Denial of Opportunity to Rectify/Condonation of Delay Failure to exercise statutory discretion for condonation before issuing final rejection: 1. The amended Section 12A(1)(ac) expressly empowers the Commissioner to condone delays where reasonable cause exists.

a. Grant the appellant opportunity to rectify the filing b. Consider condonation of delay under statutory provisions c. Issue a show-cause notice before final rejection

7 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj Relief Sought: Direction to invoke condonation provisions and grant reasonable opportunity to rectify the application Ground 5: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice Denial of substantive rights without evaluation of merit and charitable character: 1. The rejection order fails to address the substantive merits of the trust's charitable objects and activities.

a. Evaluating the trust's genuine charitable nature b. Examining the trust's track record of charitable work c. Considering the impact of denial on the beneficiary community 3. This approach violates the audi alteram partem principle (hearing the other side) and proportionality doctrine.

Relief Sought: Direction to set aside the rejection order and conduct a fresh consideration focusing on substantive charitable objects Prayer: The Appellant respectfully prays before this Hon'ble Tribunal to: 1. Set aside the order of rejection passed by the learned CIT(E).

8 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj 3. Grant registration with effect from Assessment Year 2022-23 to ensure: a. Continuity of the trust's charitable objectives b. Restoration of tax exemptions c. Relief from retrospective prejudicial impact

9 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj regarding the nature of its charitable objects and the utilization of its funds. Ground 4: Failure to Grant Proper Opportunity: The learned CIT(E) erred in passing the rejection order without providing a sufficient opportunity to the Appellant to demonstrate how its activities align with the charitable definitions under the Act, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Ground 5: Legacy of Charitable Intent: The learned CIT(E) failed to consider that the Appellant is a validly constituted Trust created for charitable purposes, and the technical rejection of a 10AB form should not permanently deprive the entity of its right to seek 80G status. Ground 6: General Ground: The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any ground(s) of appeal before or at the time of the hearing. Prayers: The Appellant respectfully prays before this Hon'ble Tribunal to: 1. Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 29-11-2025 passed by the learned CIT (Exemptions) rejecting the application for approval under Section 80G(5).

10 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj 7. Before us, the learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee is a charitable trust registered under section 12A of the Act vide Registration No. INS/24336 pursuant to the order dated 07.01.1986. It was also granted approval under section 80G vide order dated 01.11.2007 bearing No. DIT(E)/MC/80G/2875/2007/2007-08.

7.1 The learned AR submitted that the procedure for re- registration of charitable trusts was introduced during the financial year 2021-22 pursuant to the amendments made by the Finance Acts, 2020 and 2021. During the relevant period, restrictions had been imposed on account of the Covid-19 pandemic. The activities of the assessee were limited and its accounts were being maintained by a part-time accountant, who was working from home owing to the prevailing restrictions and infrastructural constraints.

7.2 It was submitted that the accountant had initiated the process of re-registration under sections 12A and 80G by filing Form No. 10A on the Income Tax Portal. However, owing to technical difficulties, the application could not initially be saved and uploaded. Subsequently, Form No. 10A seeking approval under section 80G was uploaded on 24.01.2023 and provisional approval in Form No. 10AC was granted with effect from 31.01.2023 up to A.Y. 2025-26. The application for registration

11 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj under section 12A, however, remained pending as the relevant option was not appearing in the drop-down menu on the portal. The learned AR further submitted that, upon realising that a separate application was required, the assessee filed Form No. 10A for registration under section 12A on 28.03.2025. By order dated 04.04.2025, the assessee was granted provisional registration in Form No. 10AC for three years from A.Y. 2025-26 to A.Y. 2027-28. The portal, however, did not permit the assessee to seek re- registration retrospectively from A.Y. 2022-23.

7,3 Since the provisional registration was granted only from A.Y. 2025-26, the assessee filed a fresh application in Form No. 10AB on 25.04.2025 under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) for A.Ys. 2022-23, 2023- 24 and 2024-25, together with applications seeking condonation of delay. The learned Authorised Representative contended that the learned CIT(E) rejected the application merely on the ground that it had been filed under an incorrect provision, without properly appreciating the circumstances in which Form No. 10AB had been filed.

7.4 According to the learned AR, the application was filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) because the assessee was seeking registration for the earlier period comprising A.Ys. 2022-23 to 2024-25, whereas the provisional registration already granted to it covered only A.Ys. 2025-26 to 2027-28. It was, therefore, submitted that

12 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj the application could not have been rejected merely on the ground that it ought to have been filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii).

7.5 The learned AR also submitted that the assessee continued to carry on charitable activities in accordance with the objects contained in its trust deed. Its funds were duly accounted for and applied towards its charitable objects, and its accounts were regularly audited by a qualified Chartered Accountant under the provisions of the Act. The charitable character and genuineness of the activities of the assessee had not been disputed by the learned CIT(E).

7.6 The learned AR contended that a substantive claim for registration under sections 12A and 12AB ought not to be denied merely because of a procedural error in selecting the relevant provision while filing the prescribed form. He accordingly prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) with a direction to condone the delay and adjudicate the assessee’s applications for A.Ys. 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25 on merits, after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

13 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj being restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

9.1 The material on record indicates that the assessee filed Form No. 10A on 28.03.2025 and was granted provisional registration in Form No. 10AC for A.Ys. 2025-26 to 2027-28. The controversy is confined to the intervening period comprising A.Ys. 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25. To obtain registration for the said period, the assessee filed Form No. 10AB on 25.04.2025 under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii), together with an application seeking condonation of delay.

9.2 The learned CIT(E) rejected the application on the ground that it had been filed under an incorrect provision. We find that the impugned order itself records that the assessee was registered under section 12A under the erstwhile regime prior to 01.04.2021 and that it intended to obtain re-registration under the amended regime with effect from A.Y. 2022-23. The learned CIT(E) has not

14 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj examined the charitable objects or the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and has rejected the application only because an incorrect sub-clause was selected while filing the prescribed form. In our considered view, when the substantive intention of the assessee to seek re-registration from A.Y. 2022-23 was apparent from the application, the accompanying condonation petition and the reply dated 18.11.2025, the application ought not to have been rejected merely on account of an error in selecting the applicable sub-clause. The assessee ought to have been permitted to correct the provision mentioned in the application or to file the appropriate form. A procedural error in selecting the relevant provision should not, by itself, result in a break in the registration of an otherwise eligible charitable institution.

9.3 It is also pertinent that the learned Departmental Representative, though relying upon the impugned order, has raised no objection to the matter being restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

9.4 In view of the foregoing, we set aside the impugned order dated 29.11.2025 and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The learned CIT(E) is directed to treat the application filed by the assessee on 25.04.2025 as having been filed under the appropriate section and clause applicable to an institution registered under the erstwhile regime and seeking re- registration with effect from A.Y. 2022-23. The application shall

15 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj not be rejected merely because the assessee selected an incorrect section or sub-clause while filing it electronically.

9.5 The learned CIT(E) shall consider the assessee’s request for condonation of delay in accordance with law, having regard to the transition to the amended registration regime, the Covid-19 restrictions and the difficulties stated to have been encountered by the assessee on the Income Tax Portal. The learned CIT(E) shall thereafter examine the objects and genuineness of the activities of the assessee and decide its entitlement to registration on merits. While deciding the application, the learned CIT(E) shall take into consideration the registration granted to the assessee under the erstwhile regime pursuant to the order dated 07.01.1986 and the provisional registration already granted for A.Ys. 2025-26 to 2027- 28. If the assessee otherwise satisfies the statutory conditions, registration shall be granted with effect from A.Y. 2022-23 so that there is no unintended break in its registration merely because of the procedural error in selecting the relevant form or provision.

9.6 The assessee shall furnish such documents and information as may be called for by the learned CIT(E). The learned CIT(E) shall afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order.

16 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj 9.7 The application for approval under section 80G was rejected solely as a consequence of the rejection of the assessee’s application for registration under section 12AB. Consequently, the order dated 29.11.2025 rejecting approval under section 80G is also set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E). The learned CIT(E) shall adjudicate the application under section 80G afresh after deciding the application for registration under section 12AB. If registration is granted with effect from A.Y. 2022-23, the application under section 80G shall also be considered for the appropriate corresponding period, on its own merits and in accordance with law.

9.8 We clarify that, except for directing the learned CIT(E) to treat the application as having been filed under the appropriate section and clause, we have not expressed any opinion on the substantive eligibility of the assessee for registration under section 12AB or approval under section 80G. All other issues are left open for examination by the learned CIT(E) in accordance with law.

Sd/- Sd/- (CHALL NAGENDRA PRASAD) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated 17/07/2026

17 ITA No. 1324 & 1252/Mum/2026 Shri Andheri KVO Seva Samaj PS आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��थ� / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु�ई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�ािपत �ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु�ई / ITAT, Mumbai