ATMARAM BAWA'S SHREE RAM MANDIR,309 ,JAGANNATH SHANKAR SETH RD GIRGAON MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, 6TH FLOOR, MTNL TEL. EX. BUILDING, CUMBALLA HILLS

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3603/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2027-28 Atmaram Bawa's Shree Ram CIT(Exemption), Mandir Mumbai 309 ,Jagannath Shankar Seth Rd, Girgaon Vs. Mumbai – 400002 Maharashtra (PAN: AAATA8019K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : None Revenue : Smt. Amrita Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2026 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT(Exemption), Mumbai, vide order no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025- 26/1085320057(1) dated 29.01.2026, wherein assessee’s application seeking renewal of registration u/s. 12AB(I)(b)(ii) has been rejected.

2 ITA No. 3603/Mum/2026 Atmaram Bawa’s Shree Ram Mandir AY 2027-28 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made before us as well as judicial precedents relied upon. We note that this issue relating to irrevocability and dissolution clause in the trust deed has been dealt by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in writ petition vide Writ Petition (L) No. 7587 of 2026 in the case of The Chamber of Tax Consultants and Others vs. CIT(E) dated 18.03.2026.

3.1. We perused the aforesaid judgement and find that the issue before us is identical to what has been contested in the judgment by the Hon’ble Court. All the aspects as contended by the ld. Counsel before us have been elaborately considered and dealt with by the Hon’ble Court including its own judgment in the case of Tara Educational and Charitable Trust (supra.) as well as provisions of the Act and of the MPTA. Hon’ble Court, after detailed discussion analyzed and summarized its judgment in para 45-46 to hold that a public charitable trust is deemed irrevocable by operation of law unless the instrument of trust expressly provides a power of revocation. According to the Hon’ble Court, action of ld. CIT(E) is contrary to the plain language of the statute, binding judicial precedent of this very Court and is manifestly arbitrary. In para 46, by allowing the writ petition, it passed the order giving certain directions whereby Revenue is refrained from rejecting the applications for registration/renewal u/s 12AB on the ground of absence of an explicit irrevocability/dissolution clause in the Trust Deed. In sub-para (vi), Hon’ble Court made specific mention that all such orders where renewal of registration u/s 12AB has been rejected on the grounds discussed in the said judgment are quashed and set aside.

3 ITA No. 3603/Mum/2026 Atmaram Bawa’s Shree Ram Mandir AY 2027-28 3.2. Relevant para 45 and 46 of the judgment by the Hon'ble Court (supra) are reproduced for ready reference: “45. In summary, we hold that a public charitable trust is deemed irrevocable by operation of law unless the instrument of trust expressly provides a power of revocation. The absence of an explicit irrevocability clause is not a ground for rejecting an application for registration or renewal under section 12AB of the Act. Even if the Deed provides for any revocability clause, due to operation of sections 22(3A) and 22(3B) of the MPT Act, such trusts which are registered under the MPT Act, would be irrevocable insofar as the Income-tax Act is concerned but we leave this issue open to be decided in an appropriate case. The action of Respondent No. 1 is therefore, contrary to the plain language of the statute, binding judicial precedents of this Court, and is manifestly arbitrary. Such action, as rightly pointed out by the Petitioners, have shaken the entire ecosystem of functioning of the charitable trusts. It cannot be forgotten that the trusts are contributing to nation building by doing charitable activities and that too voluntarily and, thus, must be treated with a fair and reasonable approach by the revenue. 46. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. Due to the peculiar facts, as presented by the Petitioners, we pass the following order: (i) The Respondents shall refrain from rejecting applications for registration/renewal under section 12AB solely on the ground of the absence of an explicit irrevocability and/or dissolution clause in the Trust Deed/instrument. (ii) The Respondents shall not treat the answer "Yes" to Row 6 of Form 10AB, in the absence of any explicit clause of irrevocability, as furnishing "false or incorrect information" constituting a "specified violation". Further, this shall not be a ground to reject an application for registration under section 12AB of the Act. (iii) The Respondents shall also amend the utility of Form 10A/10AB to allow applicants to correctly state their position regarding the irrevocability clause without being forced to make an incorrect declaration. This should be done as soon as possible. (iv) Question number 6 in Form 10AB should be modified to read thus, "Is the trust/institution revocable?". (v) The impugned orders passed in the case of Petitioner Nos. 3 to 8 rejecting registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, are hereby quashed and set aside. (vi) All such orders where renewal of registration under Section 12AB has been rejected on the grounds discussed above, are also hereby quashed and set aside. (vii) Further, it is also directed that all consequential orders passed denying registration under section 80G of the Act, where such rejection

4 ITA No. 3603/Mum/2026 Atmaram Bawa’s Shree Ram Mandir AY 2027-28 is on the ground that once registration under section 12AB is denied, registration under section 80G also cannot be granted, are also hereby quashed and set aside. This would, of course, apply only to a case where registration under section 12AB has been rejected on the grounds discussed above. The above order that we pass is to avoid any multiplicity of litigation so as to not require the trusts to challenge the orders passed by Respondent No. 1 denying registration under section 12AB and 80G of the Act on the grounds as discussed in this order. (viii) Respondent No.1 shall decide the applications of the Petitioners and all other similarly situated trusts, whose orders are hereby quashed, afresh and in accordance with the law and the ratio laid down in this judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. Any order so passed shall be deemed to come into effect from 1st April, 2026.” 6. In the conspectus of the above detailed discussion by taking into account the fact of the case, provisions of the Act, provisions of the MPTA and the binding judicial precedents of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay referred above as well as other judicial precedents, the issue before us is manifestly covered in favour of the assessee. We note that assessee has placed on record subsequent order passed by the same ld. CIT(E), order dated 02.04.2026 in ITBA/EXM/F/EXM53/2026-27/1088275921(1) whereby he has granted the renewal of the registration sought by the assessee by in respectful compliance to the said binding judicial directions of the Hon'ble Court. Further, in view of these facts, we find that requirement by ld. CIT(E) of furnishing the certificate of registration under the old regime is rendered infructuous. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 30 June, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 30 June, 2026 MP, Sr.P.S.

5 ITA No. 3603/Mum/2026 Atmaram Bawa’s Shree Ram Mandir AY 2027-28 Copy to : 1 The Appellant 2 The Respondent 3 DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4 Guard File 5 CIT BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Sr. Details Date Initial Designation No. 1. Draft dictated on Sr.PS/PS 2. Draft Placed before author Sr.PS/PS 3. Draft proposed & placed JM/AM before the Second Member 4. Draft discussed/approved JM/AM by Second Member 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS/PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Order pronouncement on 30.06.2026 Sr.PS/PS 7. File sent to the Bench 30.06.2026 Sr.PS/PS Clerk 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head clerk 9. Date on which file goes to the AR 10. Date of Dispatch of order