Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an application for provisional registration, which was granted. Subsequently, the assessee filed an application for regular registration, but it was rejected by the CIT(E) for being filed late, specifically one month after the due date.
Held
The Tribunal held that the minor delay of one month in filing the application for regular registration deserves to be condoned. The matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the application for regular registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act should be condoned for granting registration.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SMT. RENU JAUHRI
आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1074964499(1) CIT(E), Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 24.03.2025 in Form No. 10AD Rule 2C or 11AA or 17A of the Income-tax Act [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year: N.A.
The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal.
“A. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law, the CIT erred in rejecting the assessee's application u/s 12AB of the Act on the ground of late application. B. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT failed to appreciate that i. The provisional registration was obtained on 07-02-2024 and was valid from Α.Υ. 2024-2025 to AY 2026-2027. ii. The assessee is trust established in A.Y. 2021-2022 and has filed form 10A оn 31-01-2024. iii. The assessee applied at least six months prior to expiry of the period of the provisional approval i.e. before September 2024. iv. The interpretation of relevant laws as made by CIT, even if there is a procedural error committed may please be condoned. C. Therefore, the Appellant humbly submit that the application in Form 10AB for regularization of provisional approval may please be accepted.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed application for provisional registration which was granted vide Form 10AC dated 07.02.2024 for the period from AY 2024-25 to AY 2026-27. As per Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, the assessee was required to apply for regularisation of the registration within 6 months of commencement of its activities. Accordingly, the assessee filed the application for regular registration in Form 10AB on 24.09.2024, whereas it should have filed the application within 6 months of the commencement of activities i.e. by August, 2024. Hence the application was rejected by Ld. CIT(E) on account of late filing vide order dated 24.03.2025. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(E) the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.
It has been submitted by the AR that the trust being newly established, did not understand the relevant provisions correctly and was under the Sanjeevan Seva Rakshan Trust bonafide belief that final registration was required to the applied for before the expiry of provisional registered.
Ld. AR further pointed out that alongwith the explanation for reasons of delay, the assessee also furnished details of activities, audited financial accounts and other relevant details before Ld. CIT(E). However, Ld. CIT(E) did not condone the delay and rejected the application holding it to be non- maintainable on account of delay in filing. Ld. DR on the other hand, strongly relied on the order of Ld. CIT(E). He has argued that the application for regular registration was filed belatedly and was therefore, rightly rejected by the Ld. CIT(E).
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the material placed before us. We are of the considered opinion that the minor delay of one month deserves to be condoned in the light of explanation submitted by the assessee before Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing of application and restore the matter to Ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.