ARPHEN ASSOCIATION OF RURAL PEOPLE FOR HEALTH AND EDUCATIONAL NEEDS,NAVI MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.06.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [“CIT(E)”], rejecting its application for approval under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).

The assessee has raised grounds challenging the rejection of its application for approval under section 80G of the Act on account of the clause selected in Form No. 10AB and the alleged delay in filing the application.

Briefly stated, the assessee is a charitable trust. As recorded in the impugned order, it was granted provisional approval under section 80G of the Act for the period from A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27. The assessee filed an application in Form No. 10AB on 25.10.2025 seeking regular approval. The Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice dated 30.04.2026 calling upon the assessee to furnish the requisite documents. In response, the assessee furnished its submissions and supporting documents on 06.05.2026. The Ld. CIT(E), however, held that the assessee had selected an incorrect clause in Form No. 10AB and that the application had been filed beyond the prescribed time limit. He accordingly rejected the application without examining it on merits.

The learned Authorised Representative submitted that the assessee had filed Form No. 10AB on 25.10.2025 seeking regular approval under section 80G of the Act. He submitted that any error in selecting the relevant clause in the electronic form was procedural and that the application ought to have been considered under the applicable provision. He contended that the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application on account of the clause selected and the alleged delay, without examining the application on merits. He, therefore, prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration under the appropriate provision.

The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the impugned order. He submitted that the assessee was required to file the application under the correct statutory clause. He, however, left the matter to the Bench as regards granting a further opportunity for examination of the application on merits.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. The impugned order records that the assessee held provisional approval under section 80G of the Act for the period from A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27 and filed Form No. 10AB on 25.10.2025. However, the discussion in the impugned order regarding the applicable clauses is inconsistent. Clause (ii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) applies where an institution or fund is

In our considered view, an error, if any, in selecting the relevant clause in the electronic Form No. 10AB is a curable procedural defect in the facts of the present case. The application ought to be examined with reference to its substance and the approval actually held by the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) shall verify the nature and period of the approval held by the assessee, permit correction of the relevant clause in Form No. 10AB in the prescribed manner, if required, and reconsider the application dated 25.10.2025 under the applicable provision of the first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. The assessee shall furnish the relevant approval order and such other details and documents as may be required for this purpose.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.