MAHVEER BAL VIDHA NIKETAN SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION JAIPUR, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1525/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 October 2026AY 2026-275 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) had declined registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval under Section 80G(5)(ii) primarily on the grounds of an incomplete Form 10AB and non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The assessee's counsel requested one more opportunity to file a complete/correct Form 10AB and stated that an application for registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, was pending and expected to be issued shortly. Considering these submissions and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to grant one more adequate opportunity to the appellant to rectify the deficiencies pointed out by the CIT(E). The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and directed the CIT(E) to pass a fresh order after providing this opportunity. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mahveer Bal Vidha Niketan Samiti, filed two appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur Bench, challenging orders dated March 20, 2026, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (CIT(E)), Jaipur. The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's applications for registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grounds for rejection cited by the CIT(E) were an incomplete Form 10AB and the assessee's non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The assessee argued that these rejections were arbitrary and against the facts. The ITAT heard both parties and perused the record.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in not granting registration to the assessee trust under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on alleged reasons of incomplete Form 10AB and non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(E)'s action was illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, and against the facts. They sought a direction to grant registration under Section 12AB. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the ground that approval under Section 80G cannot be granted without registration under Section 12AB. Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that the rejection of 80G approval was consequential to the rejection of 12AB registration, against which a separate appeal was filed. They sought quashing of the proceedings. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “A” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No: 1525 & 1526/JPR/2026

Mahveer Bal Vidha Niketan CIT(Exemption), Samiti Jaipur. Vs (Respondent) 64 Bajrang Colony, Ram Nagar, Sodala, Jaipur. PAN: AAAAM3954A (Appellant)

Assessee Represented: Sh. Rajeev Sogani, C.A. Revenue Represented: Sh. Anand Swaroop, CIT Date of hearing : 14-10-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-10-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

Appellant- Mahveer Bal Vidha Niketan Samit by filing aforesaid interconnected appeals, sought to set aside the impugned orders both dated 20.03.2026 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’] on the grounds inter-alia that:- ITA No. 1525/JPR/2026 “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(E) has erred in not granting registration to the assessee trust under Section 12AB of Income

I.T.A No.1525 &1526/JPR/2026 Page No 2 Mahveeer Bal Vidha Niketan Samiti

Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. CIT(E) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by directing Id. CIT(E) to grant registration, to the assessee trust, under Section 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application of the assessee trust for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the following alleged reasons: a. Incomplete Form 10AB b. Non-registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 The action of the Id. CIT(E) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the entire proceedings. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(E) has erred in passing the order rejecting the application filed by the assessee trust for registration under Section 12AB, by not appropriately considering the submissions, along with documentary evidences, filed by the assessee trust, during the course of proceedings before the Id. CIT(E). The action of the Id. CIT(E) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by directing Id. CIT(E) to grant registration, to the assessee trust, under Section 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The assessee trust craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.”

ITA No. 1526/JPR/2026

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(E) has erred in not granting approval to the assessee trust under Section 80G of Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. CIT(E) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by directing Id. CIT(E) to grant approval, to the assessee trust, under Section 80G of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application of the assessee trust for seeking approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the following alleged reason: a. Approval u/s 80G cannot be granted without registration u/s 12AB. The action of the Id. CIT(E) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. The rejection of approval u/s 80G is purely consequential to the rejection of registration u/s 12AB, against which a separate appeal is being filed before this Hon'ble Tribunal. Relief may please be granted by quashing the entire proceedings.

I.T.A No.1525 &1526/JPR/2026 Page No 3 Mahveeer Bal Vidha Niketan Samiti

3.

The assessee trust craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.”

2.

Briefly stated, facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are : Applications moved by the appellant in Form No. 10AB, seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) were rejected on the grounds of incomplete Form 10AB and non registration under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (in short RPT Act, 1959). 3. Being aggrieved with the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E), appellant has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeals. 4. We have heard Ld. ARs for the appellant Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the record available on file. 5. Bare perusal of the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(E) particularly paras 2 and 3 of the impugned orders go to show that the registration has been declined on ground of incomplete Form 10AB and non registration under RPT Act, 1959. Ld. AR for the appellant contended that he may be given one more opportunity to file complete/correct Form 10AB and appellant has already applied

I.T.A No.1525 &1526/JPR/2026 Page No 4 Mahveeer Bal Vidha Niketan Samiti

for registration under RPT Act, 1959, which is under process and being issued shortly. 6. In the given circumstances, we are of the considered view that ultimately registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act is to be granted by the ld. CIT(E) on completing procedural formalities by the appellant and no purpose would be served by getting the appeal pending before the Tribunal. Though the appeals of the appellant were rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on cogent ground, but in the interest of justice one more opportunity is being granted. The impugned order is set aside to be passed afresh order by providing one more adequate opportunity to the appellant to plug up deficiency pointed out by the Ld. CIT(E). 7. Resultantly, both appeals filed by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/10/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 27/10/2026. *Santosh. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant-

I.T.A No.1525 &1526/JPR/2026 Page No 5 Mahveeer Bal Vidha Niketan Samiti

2.

The Respondent- 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. Guard File By order, SANTOSH Asst. Registrar/Sr.P.S. Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR KUMAR MAURYA Date: 2026.10.28 MAURYA 10:02:24 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →