SUSHOMA DATTA FOUNDATION FOR WOMENS CARE,HOWRAH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 2528/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 October 20263 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the application in Form 10AB by the assessee should be condoned. The Tribunal considered the facts of the case and noted that the CBDT, vide Circular No. 6/2026, had granted condonation for filing Form 10AB electronically for approval under clause 2 of the first proviso to Section 80G. Therefore, the Tribunal was inclined to condone the delay. The Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the file of the CIT(E) with a direction to decide the same on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sushoma Datta Foundation for Womens Care, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata (CIT(E)), dated 24.06.2026. The assessee had previously received provisional approval under Section 80G(5)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment years 2023-24 to 2025-26. Subsequently, it filed an application for regular approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) in Form 10AB on 10.10.2025, along with supporting documents. The CIT(E) rejected this application as not maintainable, citing the mandatory nature of the time limit prescribed in Section 80G(5)(iii) and stating that he lacked the authority to condone the delay in filing Form 10AB. The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history involves the rejection of the application for regular approval by the CIT(E).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the time limit prescribed in Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for filing an application for regular approval in Form 10AB is mandatory, and if so, whether the CIT(E) has the authority to condone any delay in filing. Assessee's contentions: The assessee relied on CBDT Circular No. 6/2026, which granted condonation for filing Form 10AB electronically for approval under clause 2 of the first proviso to Section 80G. This circular suggests a mechanism for condoning delays. Revenue's contentions: The revenue, through the CIT(E)'s order, argued that the time limit in Section 80G(5)(iii) is mandatory and that the CIT(E) does not possess the authority to condone delays in filing the application in Form 10AB.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(iv),Section 80G(5)(ii),Section 80G(5)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Hearing: 21.09.2026Pronounced: 07.10.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata(hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 24.06.2026. 2. At the outset, we observe that the assessee was granted provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in form 10AC by AO,CPC, Bangalore vide order dated 04.10.2022 for a period commencing from 2023-24 to 2025-26. Subsequently, the assessee filed the application seeking regular approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act. The said application was electronically Sushoma Datta Foundation For Womens Care filed on 10.10.2025, in form 10AB in accordance with Rule 17A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 al

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 80G(5)(iv)

All 127 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(iv) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →