SHALEM ASSEMBLIES OF GOD MISSION,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

The present appeals are delayed by 158 days and 67 days. Along with the present appeals, the assessee has filed the affidavit of the trustee explaining the reason for the delay in filing the present appeals.

Having considered the submissions made in the affidavits filed before us, we are of the considered view that there was sufficient cause which prevented the assessee from filing the present appeals within the prescribed limitation period. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeals by the assessee and proceeded to decide the same on the merits.

In ITA No.1311/Mum/2026, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. On the facts and circumstances of case and law the Ld CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting our application made in the Form 10AB for granting approval certificate u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of case and law, the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) failed to appreciate that the appellant already held valid provisional registration and was fully eligible for regular registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

While in its appeals being ITA No.1312/Mum/2026, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. On the facts and circumstances of case and law the Ld CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting our application made in the Form 10AB for granting approval certificate u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of case and law, the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) failed to appreciate that the appellant already held valid provisional registration and was fully eligible for regular registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

We first take up ITA No.1311/Mum/2026, which has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 17.06.2025, passed by the learned CIT(E), whereby the application filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act was rejected.

The brief facts are that the assessee was granted provisional registration under section 12A in Form 10AC vide order dated 22.06.2022 for the period from assessment year 2023-24 to 2025-26. The assessee filed an application in Form 10AB seeking the regularisation of provisional registration, which was rejected vide impugned order, observing as follows: - “M/s. Shalem Assemblies of God Mission [hereafter ‘the applicant' or 'the assessee’] filed application in Form 10AB dated 26.10.2024 seeking registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act [hereafter the Act]. The applicant has been granted Provisional Registration under Section 12A of the Act in Form 10AC dated 22.06.2022 by the CPC which was valid for the period of three years from AY 2023-24 to AY 2025-26. 2. As the trust is provisionally registered, the application for regularization of provisional registration order ought to be filed under section 12(A)(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. For reference, the provision of section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) is reproduced as under: “(iii) where the trust or institution has been provisionally registered under section 12AB, at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional registration or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier;". 3. On perusal of the Form 10AB filed by the assessee it was observed that the assessee has applied under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act which is valid only for trusts already having regular registration for five years and is seeking renewal of regular registration which is due to expire. The assessee, having provisional registration for three years, does not qualify to make the application under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. Thus, the application for registration in Form 10AB filed by the assessee is not allowable on the grounds of application filed under wrong section. However, following the principles of natural justice, an opportunity was provided to the applicant vide show cause notice having DIN& Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2025-26/1076597594(1) dated 31.05.2025 to show cause why the application in Form 10AB should not be rejected on the grounds of application filed under wrong section. 3.1 However, no response is received from the applicant in this regard. In view of the above, this application for registration in Form 10AB filed by the assessee is not allowable on the grounds of application filed under wrong section and the same is rejected. 4. For statistical purposes, this application is not maintainable and stands rejected.” Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

During the hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”) submitted that the assessee’s application for regularization of provisional registration was rejected on the ground that the application was made under the wrong provision, i.e., section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, which is applicable to charitable organizations already having regular registration and seeking renewal of the same, instead of section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, which is applicable in the case of regularization of provisional registration. The learned AR submitted that since the assessee was not put to notice regarding the defect in the application and the order rejecting the application was passed without proper opportunity of hearing, the assessee could not place relevant facts before the learned CIT(E).

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative (“learned DR”) submitted that the assessee made an application under an incorrect provision, and therefore, the same was rightly rejected by the learned CIT(E).

We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the assessee was previously granted provisional registration under section 12A. From the record, it is further evident that the assessee, within the prescribed limitation period, filed the relevant application in Form 10AB for the regularisation of the provisional registration. However, instead of mentioning section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), the assessee mentioned section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act in the said application. Since the assessee was not confronted with the defect in the application, it is evident from the record that the assessee could

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, we deem it appropriate to grant another opportunity to the assessee to set out its case for renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Act. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 17.06.2025 passed by the learned CIT(E) and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after granting reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We further direct the learned CIT(E) to either treat the application filed by the assessee under the correct provision or grant sufficient opportunity to the assessee to take necessary steps for rectification of the application. Thus, the learned CIT(E) is directed to decide the application filed by the assessee, as per law, after taking into consideration the relevant documents/details. With the above directions, the impugned order is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1311/Mum/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes.

As we have remitted the issue of grant of registration under section 12AB of the Act to the file of the learned CIT(E) for de novo adjudication, the order of the learned CIT(E) rejecting the application for registration under section 80G of the Act is also set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for deciding afresh. As a result, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1312/Mum/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/05/2026