SHRI BAPDEV MAHARAJ TRUST,KIWALE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, PUNE

There is a delay of 71 days in filing of both the appeals before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 Live Law (SC) 339, condone the said delay and proceed to decide both the appeals.

In ITA No.76/PUN/2026, the assessee has challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act while ITA No.77/PUN/2026 relates to the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in denying the approval u/s 80G of the Act.

Facts of the case in ITA No.76/PUN/2026, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 26.03.2025 for registration of the trust under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued and duly served upon the assessee through ITBA portal on 06.05.2025 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification contained therein by 21.05.2025. The Ld. CIT(E) while going through these details submitted by the assessee in response to the said notice and documents filed along with the application, found various discrepancies for which he issued another notice/show cause notice on 03.07.2025 asking the assessee for necessary compliance by 11.07.2025. The said discrepancies recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) in para 4 of the impugned order is reproduced below:

1 On verification of the details/documents furnished by the assessee in response to the said notice, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee being infructuous by observing as under :

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:

Admittedly, the facts of the case in ITA No.77/PUN/2026 are similar to that of ITA No.76/PUN/2026 narrated above. Similar grounds have been raised in ITA No. 77/PUN/2026 which read as under:

It is the submission of the Ld. AR that since the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier, he refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has already commenced its charitable activities. All the requisite details in support of charitable activities carried out by the assessee including the Income and Expenditure account have been submitted before the Ld. CIT(E). However, he has not considered the submissions of the assessee and passed the impugned order rejecting the application of the assessee. The details of the submissions made before the Ld. CIT(E) are placed on record from pages 97 to 234 of the paper book. Without prejudice, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ujwal Foundation Vs. CIT (Exemption) (2025) 175 taxmann.com 276 (Hyderabad-Trib.) wherein it has been held that non-commencement of activities at time of filing application or at time of passing order for grant of registration u/s 12AB cannot be sole reason for denial of registration without considering proposed activities of assessee trust. He, therefore, urged that in the interest of justice the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de-novo adjudication.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld CIT(E).

We have heard Ld. Representatives of the parties, perused the material available on record. We have also perused the paper book filed by the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee as well as judicial precedents cited before us. It is an admitted fact that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act holding it to be pre-mature for the reason that no charitable activities have been carried out by the trust and the trust is planning to renovate the temple with donation received by the trust. It is submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has commenced its activities and all the requisite details were submitted before the Ld. CIT(E) in support thereof. However, the Ld. CIT(E) has failed to take the cognizance of the submissions made by the assessee. He has therefore requested for setting aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the issues afresh. It is also his submission that since the application for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act was rejected and the provisional registration granted earlier was cancelled, the Ld. CIT(E) also rejected the application for grant of approval u/s 80G of the Act. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has humbly requested for grant of an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the Ld. CIT(E) by filing the requisite details/documents as desired by him.

Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case enumerated above and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper, to set aside the impugned order(s) of the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the issue(s) to his file with a direction to grant an opportunity to the assessee to explain and substantiate its case to his satisfaction by filing the requisite details/documentary evidence and decide both the applications of the assessee under section 12A and 80G of the Act afresh as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to make its submissions on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext unless required for the sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order(s) as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos. 76 & 77/PUN/2026 filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

The Pr. CIT concerned. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “बी” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. //सत्य दपि प्रदि//// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,