GAURIJA MANDIR SEVA SAMITI,HARYANA vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

At the outset, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 334 days in filing the present appeal. In response, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted an application seeking condonation of delay, which has been taken on record.

The Ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the condonation application placed on record. Upon consideration of the facts and 2 circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing the present appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Accordingly, the delay of 334 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds:

That the learned CIT (Exemption) erred in holding that the societysince application was filed under wrong provision due to inadvertent error.

On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(E) erred in rejecting final registration applied by the assessee u/s 12A(1)(ac) (iii). The rejection order passed by CIT (E) in form 10AD is against the facts and provisions of law.

That The CIT(E) has erred in dismissing application for registration merely on a nontechnical ground/reason i.e original provisional application was not filed by selecting the appropriate clause, without pointing out any discrepancy on merits.

That the rejection order passed by the CIT (E) is required to be set aside and form 10AD be issued by allowing the final registration under section 12A(1)(ac) (iii) för AY 2024-25 to 2028-29. 7. That The CIT(E) has failed to appreciate that the expenses incurred, as per the financial statements, are consistent with the aims and objects of the society. That, the CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the reason for rejection is not embedded in the specified violation as per section 12AB(4).

That the rejection of the final registration by the Learned CIT (Exemption), Chandigarh, is unjustified. The CIT (E) failed to consider that the typographical error in the provisional registration application, where the provision was incorrectly cited under Section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) (B) instead of Section 12A(1)(ac) (vi) (A), should not invalidate the final registration.

That CIT (E) failed to appreciate that the typo error in selecting the appropriate clause cannot be the reason for rejection. Furthermore, if the same had been pointed out during the provisional registration process, it could have been rectified. Therefore, the rejection of the final registration on this issue is not warranted. Judicial precedents support this view (CIT v. Muktisar welfare club) ,IT appeal no 182 & 325/ Asr/2025. 10. That the learned CIT (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application solely based on minor procedural non-compliance, despite the appellant having made

That the learned CIT (Exemption) failed to provide adequate opportunity of being heard and passed the order in undue haste.That the order is otherwise unjust, excessive, and deserves to be quashed.The Appellate craves the right to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of the appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee society had filed an application seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. During the course of proceedings, the Ld. CIT(E) issued questionnaire calling for various details/documents in order to verify the genuineness of the activities and compliance with the objects of the society. The assessee thereafter filed its reply stating that the activities had commenced on 28.05.2023, being the date of opening of the donation box of the temple. The Ld. CIT(E), after considering the reply of the assessee, observed that since the activities of the assessee had already commenced prior to seeking provisional registration, the provisional registration earlier granted to the assessee was bad in law and consequently the application filed in Form No.10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) was liable to be rejected. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee.

Against the order of the Ld. CIT(E) the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

Before us, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the rejection of registration by the Ld. CIT(E) is merely on account of a technical/clerical defect in filing of the form and not on account of non-genuineness of the activities of the assessee society. It was contended that the assessee had inadvertently selected the incorrect form/category while making the application for registration. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is running and managing a temple and carrying out religious/charitable activities and there is no adverse finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) regarding the genuineness of the activities or violation of the objects of the society. It was further submitted that the assessee should not be denied the benefit of registration merely because of an 4 inadvertent mistake in selection of the form while filing the online application. The Ld. AR therefore prayed that the matter may kindly be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after permitting the assessee to place all relevant documents and explain the circumstances regarding filing of the application.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the findings recorded in the impugned order. It was submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has passed the order in accordance with the provisions of the Act after noticing that the activities of the assessee had already commenced prior to grant of provisional registration. It was further submitted that the assessee had itself admitted before the Ld. CIT(E) that the activities had commenced on 28.05.2023 and therefore the Ld. CIT(E) was justified in holding that the provisional registration itself was not in accordance with law. The Ld. DR accordingly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E).

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the registration application of the assessee has been rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) primarily on the ground that the assessee had already commenced its activities prior to grant of provisional registration and therefore the provisional registration itself was bad in law. However, it is the specific plea of the assessee before us that there was merely a clerical/technical mistake in selection of the appropriate form/category while filing the online application and because of such inadvertent mistake, the application came to be considered under an incorrect provision.

1 We further find that the impugned order does not contain any adverse finding regarding the genuineness of the activities of the assessee society or regarding deviation from its stated objects. The rejection has essentially been made on technical considerations arising out of the manner in which the application was filed electronically. In our considered opinion, substantive benefit available under the Act should not ordinarily be denied merely because

2 Considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The assessee shall be at liberty to explain the circumstances relating to filing of the application and also furnish all necessary documents/details in support of its claim for registration. The Ld. CIT(E) shall examine the claim of the assessee afresh in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 01/06/2026 मनोज कुमारअ"वाल लिलत कुमार (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (LALIET KUMAR) लेखा सद"/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "ाियक सद"/JUDICIAL MEMBER AG आदेश की "ितिलिपअ"ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

""थ"/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु"/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु" (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च"ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड" फाईल/ Guard File