JYOTIRMANI FOUNDATION,ULHASNAGAR vs. EXEMPTION WARD, THANE

ITA 8467/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 October 2026AY 2027-288 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jyotirmani Foundation, filed applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 31/10/2025. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune (Ld. CIT(E)), rejected both applications by orders dated 29/06/2026. The rejection was based on the assessee furnishing a copy of provisional registration (Form No. 10AC) instead of regular registration/approval, leading the Ld. CIT(E) to conclude that the prerequisites under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and Section 80G(5) were not fulfilled. The assessee contended that this was an inadvertent procedural defect and sought an opportunity to rectify it. The appeals were filed by the assessee against these rejection orders for Assessment Year 2027-28.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the rejection of the assessee's applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G was based on a curable procedural defect. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had specifically pleaded that the defect was inadvertent and sought an opportunity to rectify it. Considering that the issue of registration of a charitable institution and its approval for deductions should be examined on merits after proper consideration of documents and provisions, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity. Accordingly, the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) were set aside, and the applications were restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(E) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard and permit the assessee to furnish necessary documents and explanations. The Tribunal explicitly stated that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the assessee's eligibility for registration or approval, leaving all issues open for the Ld. CIT(E)'s consideration. The appeal concerning Section 80G approval was considered consequential to the Section 12AB registration.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Ld. CIT(E) on the ground of furnishing a provisional registration instead of a regular one was justified, considering the assessee's plea of an inadvertent procedural defect and request for an opportunity to rectify. 2. Whether the rejection of the assessee's application for approval under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Ld. CIT(E) on similar grounds was justified, and if it was consequential to the decision on the Section 12AB registration. Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the selection of the relevant statutory clause and the submission of provisional registration were inadvertent procedural defects that should have been allowed to be rectified. The assessee sought restoration of the applications for fresh adjudication on merits after being granted a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Revenue's contentions: The Ld. DR appeared virtually. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB,Section 80G,Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 8467/MUM/2026
ITA 8468/MUM/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई पीठें, म ुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: C BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 8467/MUM/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2027-28) ULHASNAGAR, KALYAN- THANE-400602, 421002, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAGCJ2904F

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: None Shri Srinivasa Rao Vona, प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: CIT DR (virtually appeared) ITA 8468/MUM/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2027-28) ULHASNAGAR - 02, KALYAN- THANE-400602, 421002, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAGCJ2904F

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: None Shri Srinivasa Rao Vona, प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: CIT DR (virtually appear

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 5,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →