KAI ANANT SHRIDHAR OAK VANAUSHADHI SANSHODHAN VA SANVARDHAN PRATISHTHAN,RAIGAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

ITA 2577/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 September 2026AY 2026-276 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had inadvertently selected an inapplicable sub-clause for filing the application for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) instead of the correct sub-clause applicable to it as an existing registered trust. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments that the wrong selection of the section code/clause would not disentitle the assessee to its rightful claim. Citing decisions of Co-ordinate Benches, particularly in the case of Samarth Bharat Sanskar Kendra and Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust, the Tribunal noted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the CIT(E) and restored the matter to his file for fresh adjudication. The CIT(E) was directed to treat the application as filed under the correct clause/section code and decide it afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee was also directed to file the correct application if needed and make necessary compliance without seeking unnecessary adjournments. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kai Anant Shridhar Oak, a Public Charitable Trust, filed an appeal against the order dated 10.09.2025 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)], Pune. The CIT(E) rejected the assessee's application for regular registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, previously registered under Section 12AA and granted provisional registration under Section 12AB, applied for regular registration in Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025 under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B). The CIT(E) issued notices for discrepancies, and after the assessee's reply, rejected the application, citing the inapplicability of Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) because the assessee had claimed deductions under Section 11 in past assessment years. The rejection was based on the selection of a wrong clause/section code in the application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the CIT(E) on the ground of selecting a wrong clause/section code is sustainable, when the assessee claims it was an inadvertent technical error? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the rejection was due to a technical error in selecting the wrong section code while e-filing Form 10AB. This inadvertent mistake should not lead to the rejection of the application, especially since the assessee was already within the registration framework through prior registrations. The assessee relied on various decisions of Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal and CBDT Circular No. 7/2024, stating that filing under the wrong section code is a curable defect and not a ground for substantive rejection. The assessee prayed for the issue to be remitted to the CIT(E) for de novo adjudication. Revenue's Contention: The Departmental Representative supported the order of the CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi),Section 12AA,Section 12AB,Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Chandan Katariya
For Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete, CIT-DR
Hearing: 07.07.2026Pronounced: 23.09.2026

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.09.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [“CIT(E)”], Pune rejecting the application for grant of regular registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”).

2.

Although several grounds of appeal have been raised by the assessee, all these relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the assessee application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act on the ground of selection of wrong clause/section code in filing the applicatio

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 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →