EXPERIENCED BASED HOLISTIC LEARNING ENVIRONMENT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3147/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 June 2026AY 2026-273 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the rejection was purely procedural and that the assessee should have been granted an opportunity to rectify the technical defect. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for renewal of its registration under section 80G, but its application was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) due to an inadvertent clerical error in selecting the wrong clause in Form 10AB. The trust argued that this was a technical defect and it should have been given an opportunity to correct it.

What were the issues?

Whether an application for renewal of registration under Section 80G can be rejected solely on procedural grounds due to a technical error, without affording an opportunity to rectify it? Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 23.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3147/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2026-27 Experienced Based Holistic The Commissioner of Income Learning Environment Trust Tax (Exemption), Mumbai 38/304, Anand Nagar, Vakola Police Station Lane, Santacruz East, Vs. Mumbai – 400055 Maharashtra (PAN : AAATE9581A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : None Revenue : Smt. Amrita Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 17.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2026 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(Exemption), Mumbai, vide order nos. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025- 26/1085733077(1) dated 08.02.2026, wherein assessee’s applications seeking renewal of registration u/s. 80G have been rejected.

2.

The only issue in the present appeal is in respect of rejection of application filed by the assessee seeking approval u/s. 80G(5) on account of Form 10AB filed by mentioned wrong clause, i.e., clause(ii) instead of clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5). According to

2 ITA No. 3147/Mum/2026 Experienced Based Holistic Learning Environment Trust AY 2026-27

the assessee selection of the clause in the electronic form occurred due to an inadvertent clerical/technical error which was completely unintentional. It is submitted that assessee is a charitable trust engaged in activities of educational and holistic learning development. Assessee was granted provisional approval u/s. 80G on 16.11.2023 valid for the period Assessment Year 2024-25 to Assessment Year 2025- 26. For the purpose of regularizing the provisional approval, assessee filed its application in Form 10AB on 30.09.2025 seeking continuation/renewal of the approval so granted provisionally. Assessee furnished required documentary evidences, called for by the ld. CIT(E) which are placed on record. It is noted that no adverse finding is given while rejecting the application of the assessee in regard to charitable nature of the assessee, genuineness of its activities or other compliance requirement of the Act. The rejection of the application is purely procedural on account of technical defect. In this regard, assessee submitted that an opportunity ought to have been granted to correct the technical defect instead of outrightly rejecting the application, which has caused grave hardships to the assessee in carrying out its charitable activities. Assessee has also raised a grievance that it was deprived of an adequate opportunity of being heard and presenting its case before the ld. CIT(E). It has, therefore, been pleaded that in the interest of substantial justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merits after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing.

3.

The learned Departmental Representative fairly submitted that she would have no serious objection if the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

3 ITA No. 3147/Mum/2026 Experienced Based Holistic Learning Environment Trust AY 2026-27

4.

Having considered the rival submissions and the material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the impugned ex parte order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law by taking into account the correct clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) applicable in the case of the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(E) is set aside and the matter is restored to his file with a direction to decide the application on merits and in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the appellate proceedings.

5.

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 23 June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 23 June, 2026 MP, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1 The Appellant 2 The Respondent 3 DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4 Guard File 5 CIT BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →