IIITB INNOVATION CENTRE,BANGLAORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) , BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3129/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 June 2026AY 2025-264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemptions) erred in rejecting the application without adhering to the principles of natural justice. The assessee should have been given an opportunity to rectify the mistake or present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for recognition under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but used the wrong form code. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application solely on this technical ground without providing an opportunity for rectification or hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of an application for Section 80G registration due to a technical error in the form code, without granting an opportunity for rectification or hearing, is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: HON’BLE PRASHANT MAHARISHI & HON’BLE KESHAV DUBEY

आदेश / ORDER

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT:

This appeal is filed by IIITB INNOVATION CENTRE [the Assessee] against the order of Ld. CIT(Exemptions) dated 29-Dec-2025 for the Assessment Year 2025-26 rejecting the application made by the assessee for recognition under section 80 G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] wherein the learned CIT appeal held as under:-

2.

On verification of the application in Form No.10AB filed on 20- 05-2025 for registration u/s.80G of the Income tax Act 1961, it is seen that, the trust was supposed to file application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G since, trust has obtained Provisional Registration u/s.80G vide Form No.10AC From 2022-23 to AY 2024-25. However, the application is filed in Form No.10AB under clause (iv)(B) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G. Assessee had selected the wrong section code while applying Form 10AB for registration u/s. 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, application in Form 10AB for 80G dated 20-05-2025 is rejected. 3. The assessee is aggrieved with the above order wherein just because of the reason that assessee has mentioned the wrong section code while applying form No. 10 AB for registration under section 80 G of the Act, the application of the assessee was dismissed without granting assessee an opportunity of hearing or allowing an opportunity to rectify the application.

4.

On appeal before us the ld. AR vehemently submitted that the learned CIT (Exemption) is incorrect in holding that assessee has made a selection of wrong section code while applying form No. 10 AB for registration under section 80 G of the Act. In the circumstances the learned CIT – A is duty-bound to give assessee an opportunity of hearing or an opportunity to rectify the above mistake. The learned CIT – A has therefore exceeded his jurisdiction and has dismissed the application of the assessee.

5.

The learned CIT DR, Mr Shivananda Kalakeri supports that the assessee has filed the application for recognition under section 80 G of the Act by specifying the wrong code, it is the duty of the assessee to file a correct application. Even otherwise he submitted that if the assessee can file the correct application, the application for recognition under section 80 G of the Act can be considered on merits.

6.

We have carefully considered the rival contention and find that the application made by the assessee in form No. 10 AB filed on 20.5.2025 under section 80G of the Act was filed under wrong code and therefore the CIT (Exemption) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. We find that the principles of the natural justice demands that assessee should have been given an opportunity either to rectify or to give a show cause at least that why the application made by the assessee should not be dismissed on this count. Without carrying out this exercise the CIT (Exemption) is not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee.

7.

In view of the above facts, we restore the appeal of the assessee back to the file of the CIT (Exemption) and direct the assessee to furnish the corrected application under form No. 10 AB by mentioning the correct code. The CIT (Exemption) is also directed to consider the application of the assessee and then if found in accordance with the law, after making necessary enquiries, grant registration/recognition to the assessee under section 80 G of the Act.

8.

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04th June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

KESHAV DUBEY PRASHANT MAHARISHI JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Bangalore Dated: 04th June, 2026. /Desai S Murthy / Copy to:

1 IIITB INNOVATION CENTRE, 26/C, HOSUR ROAD, ELECTRONIC CITY, BENGALURU-560100. 2 CIT(EXEMPTIONS) , UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560027. 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE CIT(APPEALS) 5 THE D.R., ITAT, BANGALORE BENCH A

BY ORDER

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., BANGALORE

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →