NIKHIL GUPTA FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION , JAIPUR

ITA 42/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 September 20265 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the primary ground of rejection, which was the delay in filing the application, could not be sustained. The Tribunal noted that a proviso to section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act, effective from 01.10.2024, allows the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to condone delays if there is a reasonable cause. The learned CIT(E) did not consider this proviso before deeming the application infructuous. Furthermore, the Tribunal observed that the CIT(E)'s order incorrectly referred to a valid provisional certificate as a prerequisite for an application under sub-clause (ii) of section 12A(1)(ac), whereas the assessee's application was under sub-clause (iii). Regarding other grounds, such as observations on the objects clause, revision of NOC, mismatch in activities, and non-furnishing of beneficiary/donor details, the Tribunal found these to be relevant but intertwined with the issue of limitation. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the application to the file of the learned CIT(E) for a fresh decision, allowing the CIT(E) to re-examine all aspects, including the condonation of delay under the proviso to section 12A(1)(ac). The cancellation of provisional registration was also set aside to be decided afresh. The Tribunal expressed no opinion on the merits of the application.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Nikhil Gupta Foundation, is appealing an order dated 25.09.2025 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur (CIT(E)). The CIT(E) rejected the assessee's application for regular registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and cancelled its provisional registration. The assessee had a provisional registration valid until 31.03.2025 and filed for regular registration on 24.03.2025. The CIT(E) rejected the application citing, among other reasons, that it was filed after the prescribed time limit and that the assessee did not hold a valid provisional registration on the date of the order. The appeal was filed with a delay of 40 days, which the Tribunal condoned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the learned CIT(E) rejecting the application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act is wrong, unwarranted, and bad in law. 2. Whether the order passed by the learned CIT(E) rejecting the provisional registration under section 12A of the Act is wrong, unwarranted, and bad in law. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the rejection of the application and cancellation of provisional registration were not justified on facts and in law. The assessee claimed to be engaged in charitable activities and capable of explaining the issues raised by the CIT(E). Revenue's Contentions: The revenue relied on the impugned order, submitting that the learned CIT(E) had recorded specific adverse findings regarding the objects and activities of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR Before: Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member And Shri Prakash, Accountant Member ITA No: 42/JPR/2026 Assessment Year: NA

Nikhil Gupta Foundation CIT C/o CA R.S. Poonia D-82- PAN: AADTN 7420 Q (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Sh. Rajat Choudhary, Adv. Revenue Represented: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT Date of hearing : 23-09-2026 Date of pronouncement : 30-09-2026

PER : PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

1.

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as "the learned CIT(E)"] dated 25.09.2025 passed in Form No. 10AD under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), rejecting the application of the Assessee for registration under section 12AB of the Act and cancelling its provisional registration.

2.

There is a delay of 40 days in filing this appeal before us. The Assessee has filed a condonation application supported by an affidavit of its Managing Trustee dated 20.07.2026, explaining that the counse

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →