KALKI TEJOMAYA SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST,KARJAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS), 1(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3031/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 July 2025Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had been enjoying approval under Section 80G since 2009 and was eligible for regular approval even when applying for provisional approval. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an application for regular registration under section 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act after its provisional approval expired. The application was rejected by the CIT(E) primarily on the grounds of being filed late and alleged violations of Section 11.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application for regular registration based on delay and alleged violations, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80G(5),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Hearing: 10.07.2025Pronounced: 16.07.2025

स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing 10.07.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement 16.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai dated 27.03.2025 passed u/s. 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.].

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for regular registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.

AY: NA Kalki Tejomaya Social Welfare Trust.

2.

The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting and not condoning the delay for filing of application for renewal of the provisional certificate of registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act without considering the reasons submitted in the condonation application.

3.

The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act on the ground that there was violation of provision of section 11 of the Act as the Trust Deed/ Memorandum of Association are in violation of statutory provisions.

4. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application for registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act by wrongly interpreting the Trust’s object clause (pertaining to organizing seminars and symposiums at international level). 5. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in disregarding the charitable activities carried out by the Trust for rural development, as duly informed in the application for renewal of the provisional registration under section 80G(5) of the Act. 6. The impugned order rejecting registration is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, bad in law.” 3. Brief facts are that the assessee filed an application for regular approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act in Form No. 10AB on 14.09.2024. The assessee had earlier been granted provisional approval vide order dated from 29.03.2022 till AY 2024-25. Ld. CIT(E) observed that the assessee should have filed an application for regularisation of provisional approval in Form No. 10AB latest by the end of September, 2023 in view of provisions of Section 80G(5)(iii) which reads as under:

“Where the trust or institution has been provisionally approved, at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier;” 3.1. Accordingly, the application for regularisation of provisional approval was rejected on the ground of late filing. The Ld. CIT(E) also held that approval is also not allowable on account of violation of provisions of Section 11 of the Act. Aggrieved with the rejection order dated 27.03.2025 the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

Before us, Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee was granted initial approval u/s. 80G of the Act way back in 2009 vide order dated 08.02.2010, a copy of which has been placed before us. He has further submitted that under AY: NA Kalki Tejomaya Social Welfare Trust. the new regime of registration/approval, the assessee applied for provisional approval under a mistaken belief. In fact, since the assessee has enjoying the approval u/s. 80G of the Act since 09.03.2009, it was entitled to get regular approval in the first instance itself. Accordingly, Ld. AR has argued that instead of granting provisional approval, the department should have given regular approval in response to initial application.

Ld. AR also drew our attention to the CBDT Circular No. 11/2022 dated 03.06.2022 wherein it has been clarified as under:

“(ii) Where due to technical glitches, Form No. 10AC has been issued during FY 2021- 2022 with the heading “Order for provisional registration” or “Order for provisional approval” instead of “Order for registration” or “Order for approval”, then all such Form No. 10AC shall be considered as an “Order for registration or approval” and, in such cases where Form No. 10AC has been issued, --- (a) Under section code 01 (applications seeking re-registration), --- (i) In the heading and in rows 6,7,9 and 10 the words, “provisional registration” shall be read as “registration”; (ii) In row 8 the word “Provisionally registered” shall be read as “registered”; (b) Under section codes 03,04,05,06 or 11 (applications seeking re-approval),-- (i) in the heading and in rows 6,7,9 and 10 the words, “provisional approval” shall be read as “approval”; (ii) in row 8 the word “provisionally approved” shall be read as “approved”; (iii) row no. 5 of form no. 10AC (issued for all section codes) shall be read as “Unique Registration Number” instead of “Provisional Approval/ Approval Number “Provisional Registration/ Registration Number”, as the case maybe.” In the light of this beneficial circular issued by the CBDT, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s application for provisional approval should have been considered for regular approval.

5.

On the other hand, Ld. DR has argued that the assessee itself applied for provisional registration which was duly granted. Accordingly, there was no error in the order of Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the application for regular approval and, therefore, assessee’s appeal deserved to be dismissed.

AY: NA Kalki Tejomaya Social Welfare Trust.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us. Admittedly, the assessee has been enjoying approval u/s. 80G of the Act since 09.03.2009. The assessee has also been granted regular registration u/s. 12AB under the new regime as well. While applying for approval u/s. 80G of the Act, the application has erroneously been made for provisional approval whereas the assessee was eligible to be considered for regular approval even at that time as per the provisions of Section 80G of the Act read with the clarificatory circular dated 03.06.2022. Accordingly in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to Ld. CIT(E) to decide the issue of regular approval afresh on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.

8.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- ANIKESH BANERJEE RENU JAUHRI (न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER) (लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai दिन ुंक /Date 16.07.2025 दिव्य रमेश न ुंिग वकर/ स्टेनो आदेश की प्रनतनलनि अग्रेनित/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यानित प्रनत //True Copy// आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →