INDIAN FEDERATION OF NEUROREHABILITATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEM. WARD 1(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6589/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 July 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the incorrect filing of the form under a specific clause was a technical and curable procedural defect. The substantive claim for registration should be examined on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under section 12AB was rejected by the CIT(E) because Form 10AB was filed under the incorrect clause of section 12A(1)(ac). The assessee argued that this was a technical defect and offered to rectify it.

What were the issues?

Whether a rejection of a registration application solely on the ground of filing under an incorrect clause of section 12A(1)(ac) is sustainable when the defect is curable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D‘ BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan
For Respondent: Shri. Azhar Kabir (Sr. DR)
Hearing: 10/07/2026Pronounced: 10/07/2026

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 28.03.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai, whereby the assessee’s application seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been rejected.

2 ITA No. 6589/Mum/2026 Indian Federation of Neurorehabilitation

2.

Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(E) rejected the application solely on the ground that Form No. 10AB had been filed under clause (iv) of section 12A(1)(ac), whereas according to the learned CIT(E), the application ought to have been filed under clause (iii) of the said provision. It was submitted that the defect, if any, is merely technical and procedural in nature and is capable of being rectified. It was further submitted that the assessee has already corrected the mistake and is prepared to file the application under the appropriate clause. It was, therefore, prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The learned Departmental Representative fairly left the issue to the discretion of the Bench.

3.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the impugned order has been passed solely on the ground that the application in Form No. 10AB was filed under an incorrect clause of section 12A(1)(ac). In our considered opinion, such a defect is only a technical and curable procedural irregularity and ought not to defeat the assessee’s substantive claim for registration. Once the procedural defect is capable of being rectified, the application deserves to be examined on its merits rather than being rejected outright on such technical ground.

3 ITA No. 6589/Mum/2026 Indian Federation of Neurorehabilitation

4.

Accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(E). The assessee shall file or rectify the application under the appropriate clause, if not already done, and furnish all requisite documents and information. Thereafter, the learned CIT(E) shall consider the assessee’s application on its own merits and pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 10th July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 10/07/2026 KARUNA, sr.ps

4 ITA No. 6589/Mum/2026 Indian Federation of Neurorehabilitation

Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy//

BY ORDER,

(Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 12AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →