KAUSHALAM FOUNDATION,AJMER ROAD vs. CIT-EXEMPTION JAIPUR , JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 550/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 October 2026AY 2026-273 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the appellant, Kaushalam Foundation, is allowed. The reasoning was that the CIT(E) had previously passed an order dated 27.09.2026 granting registration to the appellant under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that all objections raised by the CIT(E) while rejecting the application for approval under Section 80G(5)(iv)(B) had become infructuous, as they had already been decided in favour of the appellant during the disposal of the Section 12AB application. Since approval under Section 80G is consequential to registration under Section 12AB, and the latter had been granted, the Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to issue the approval under Section 80G in accordance with the law. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kaushalam Foundation, filed an appeal against an order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)], Jaipur. The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for permanent registration under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grounds for rejection included an incomplete Form 10AB, non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and non-genuineness of activities and non-compliance. The assessee contended that the CIT(E) erred in facts and law by cancelling the application. The procedural history involves the assessee filing an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) after the rejection by the CIT(E).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(E), Jaipur, erred in facts and in law by cancelling the application u/s 80G(5) for permanent registration. (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(E) erred in cancelling the application for permanent registration under Section 80G(5). The assessee also stated that they reserve the right to add, amend, or alter grounds of appeal. Subsequently, the assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) brought on record an order dated 27.09.2026 passed by the CIT(E) granting registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the Ld. DR for the Revenue was heard, but their specific contentions are not detailed in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANCT MEMBER

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “A” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANCT MEMBER ITA No: 550/JPR/2026

Kaushalam Foundation The CIT (Exemption) IT-A-016F Mahindra Jaipur. Vs (Respondent) World City, Village Kalwara, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. PAN: AAGCK2021C (Appellant)

Assessee Represented: Sh. Shailesh Mantri, C.A. Revenue Represented: Sh. Ananad Swaroop, CIT Date of hearing : 08-10-2026 Date of pronouncement : 22-10-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

The Appellants, Kaushalam Foundation by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’] on the ground that:- “1. That the Ld. CIT(E), Jaipur, has erred in facts and in law by cancelling the application u/s 80G(5) for permanent registration. 2. That the appellant craves to add, amend, and alter the grounds before or at the time of appellate hearing.”

I.T.A No.550/JPR/2026 Page No 2 Kaushalam Foundation

2.

Briefly stated, facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issued at hand are : Appellant’s application moved in Form No. 10AB, seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) was rejected on ground of incomplete Form 10AB, non registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and non genuineness of activities & non compliance. 3. Being aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(E), appellant has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have heard Ld. ARs for the appellant and Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the record available on file. 5. At the very outset, Ld. AR for the appellant has brought on record the order dated 27.09.2026 passed by the Ld. CIT(E) for granting registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Now there is an appeal before the Bench challenging the rejection of appellant’s application u/s 80G of the Act. When registration u/s 12AB of the Act has already been granted to the appellant, all the objections raised by the Ld. CIT(E) while rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB seeking approval 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the Act have become infructuous,

I.T.A No.550/JPR/2026 Page No 3 Kaushalam Foundation

having already been decided in favour of the appellant while disposing off his application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Approval u/s 80G of the Act being consequential to the registration u/s 12AB of the Act, and appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and the Ld. CIT(E) to issue the approval u/s 80G of the Act in accordance with law. 6. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 22-10-2026 .

Sd/- Sd/- (PRAKASH) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 22/10/2026. *Santosh. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- 2. The Respondent- 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. Guard File By order,

Asst. Registrar

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →