TEJIBAI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE ()
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders, dated 21/03/2023 and 17/12/2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(E)’] in relation to registration of the assessee trust under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
The facts, briefl trust engaged in the school situated in S provisional registrati 1961 (hereinafter r 11.02.2022, which Subsequently, on 29 Form No. 10AB seek the Act. However, the order dated 21.03.20 “3. On verification of was found that the a required to be accomp notice was issued ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/ the assessee to furni 17A(2). The assessee material on record, a s ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/ the assessee to furnis the activities carried ou 4. The Applicant has submission filed by the named ‘New Model En paid rent of Rs. 16,80 other trustees are pa professional fees. As trustees it is in violatio 5. In conclusion, this ap 3. Aggrieved by th the present appeal. assessee submitted t delay of 761 days. In T ITA Nos.
ly stated, are that the assessee e field of education through the antacruz, Mumbai. The assess on under Section 12AB of the referred to as “the Act”) vid was valid up to Assessment
9.09.2022, the assessee filed an king regular registration under S e application was rejected by th
023, on the following grounds::
the application in Form 10AB filed by the a application was not complete, and all the panying the application were not furnished d to the applicant vide
DIN
&
N
/2022-23/1048940116(1) dated 19.01.2023
ish the complete set of documents mention filed its submission on 01.02.2023.On peru showcause notice was also issued vide DIN &
/2022-23/1050524718(1) dated 08.03.2023
sh further requirements to ascertain the genu ut by the trust.
s submitted its reply on 09.03.2023. On e assessee it is observed that the trust is run nglish High School’. One trustee Mr. Rajesh Kh
0,000/- for the premises out of the trust fund aid from the trust fund in the form of s the income of the trust is applied for the be on of Section 13(1 )(c)(ii).
application for grant of registration stands reje he aforesaid order, the assesse
At the outset, the learned c that the appeal has been filed b n support of the application for Tejibai Educational Society
2
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
e is a charitable e operation of a see was granted
Income-tax Act, de order dated
Year 2024–25. n application in Section 12AB of he ld CIT(E) vide assessee, it documents d. Hence, a Notice
No.
requesting ed in Rule usal of the & Notice No.
requesting uineness of perusal of ning school hairajani is d. Similarly salary and nefit of the ected.”
ee has preferred counsel for the belatedly with a r condonation of delay, reliance has b assessee has explain the delay. The crux o of the initial applica application, which w upon professional ad original rejection or prompting the prese delay was neither de due to an inadverten advice. In support of on the judgment of t
Katiji [(1987) 167 ITR considerations must that ordinarily, a remedies. The relevan
“5. Thereafter
29.09.2022 s
Act. The said dated 21.03.2
the submissio
6. After consi file a fresh a section 12AB inadvertently application w
04.06.2024 w fresh applicat of 2024, date
T
ITA Nos.
been placed on a detailed petiti ned the sequence of events wh of the explanation is that followi ation, the assessee was advised was also rejected on 04.06.20
dvice, it was realized that the ap rder dated 21.03.2023 had n ent appeal. The petitioner con eliberate nor actuated by mala nt omission in good faith, sup f the prayer for condonation, re this Court in Collector, Land Ac
R 471 (SC)], wherein it was held yield to the cause of substan litigant does not benefit by nt part of the petition is reprodu r, the Applicant filed an application in Fo seeking final registration under section application was rejected by the Ld.CIT(E
2023 without appreciating the facts of t ons made by the Applicant.
dering the above order, the Applicant wa application in Form 10AB seeking regist
B of the Act. While filing the said form, th mentioned a wrong section.
The was rejected by the Ld.CIT(E) vide wherein a liberty was granted to the Appli tion before 30.06.2025 in view of CBDT C d 25.04.2024. Tejibai Educational Society
3
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
ion wherein the hich occasioned ing the rejection d to file a fresh
024. Thereafter, peal against the not been filed, ntends that the fides but arose pported by legal eliance is placed cquisition v. Mst.
d that technical ntial justice and delaying legal uced as under:
orm 10AB on 12AB of the E) vide order the case and as advised to tration under he Applicant, erefore, the order dated icant to file a Circular No. 7
The App 11.06.2024 in vide order da challenged b 1044/Mum/2 adjudication. 8. In the cou ITAT in ITA 1 the Applicant dated 21.03.2 was of the v aside, the Ap Hon'ble ITAT 9. Hence, as Applicant is f passed by th the Hon'ble IT 10. The App caused due t not deliberate present appe always acted Thus, the Hon 761 days in reasonable ca 11. The Applic case 167 ITR "When pitted deserv have a non-de 12. In view o your honor m condone the d 4. We have consid furnished by the ass including Concord of T ITA Nos.
plicant therefore, filed the fresh app n form 10AB which was rejected by th ated 17.12.2024. The said rejection ord by the Applicant before the Hon'ble I
2025
on 17.02.2025
which is p rse of preparation for the appeal before
1044/Mum/2025, the tax professional r t has not filed the appeal against the rej
2023 before the Hon'ble ITAT. The tax view that unless the order dated 21.03
Applicant cannot get relief as it sough in ITA 1044/Mum/2025. per the advice sought from the tax prof filing the appeal against the order dated he Ld.CIT(E) on 18.06.2025. The appeal
TAT is barred by limitation by 761 days.
licant submits that the delay in filing to circumstances beyond my control and e. There was a reasonable cause due t eal got delayed. The Applicant submits d with due diligence to discharge its stat n'ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone n filing the present appeal in view of ause.
cant relies on the observation of the Apex
471 (SC) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. K substantial justice and technical consid against each other, the cause of substa ves to be preferred, for the other side can a vested right in injustice being done b eliberate delay."
of the above submissions, the Applican ay to be pleased to consider the facts of delay of 761 days and oblige.”
ered the rival submissions and sessee. As enunciated in a cate f India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sm
Tejibai Educational Society
4
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
plication on he Ld. CIT(E) der has been ITAT in ITA pending for e the Hon'ble realized that ejection order professional
3.2023 is set t before the fessional, the d 21.03.2023
l filed before appeal was the same is to which the that he has tutory duties.
e the delay of f the above x Court in the Katiji.
derations are antial justice nnot claim to because of a nt prays that the case and the explanation ena of decisions mt. Nirmala Devi
[(1979) 118 ITR 507
2002 SC 1201], mak must receive a libe advance the cause of default, negligence, o
4.1 Having regard t the case, we are satis was occasioned by cause” within the m the appeal is hereb adjudication.
5. Turning to the m the assessee pertains that payments were Section 13(1)(c) of th submits that such were made in furthe were below fair mark
CIT(E) neither exam opportunity of being
Additionally, it is arg pertains to the doma of registration under T
ITA Nos.
(SC)] and Ram Nath Sao v. Goba kes it abundantly clear that “s ral and purposive interpretati f justice, particularly where no e or mala fides is discernible.
to the totality of the facts and c sfied that the delay in filing the bona fide reasons and constit meaning of law. Accordingly, the by condoned and the appeal merits of the matter, the princi s to the rejection of registration e made to trustees, allegedly he Act. The learned counsel fo payments, including rent and erance of the trust’s education ket value. It is further submitt mined the matter objectively n g heard before arriving at the a gued that the question of violatio in of assessment proceedings an Section 12AB.
Tejibai Educational Society
5
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
ardhan Sao [AIR sufficient cause”
ion in order to element of wilful ircumstances of e present appeal tutes “sufficient e delay in filing is admitted for ipal grievance of n on the ground in violation of for the assessee d remuneration, nal objects and ted that the Ld.
nor granted an adverse finding.
on of Section 13
nd not the stage
1 We find merit alleged violation of rejection of registrat that the assessee be being heard. Admitte not reflect any such issue of actual app persons may, in appr during assessment p of registration under and irrefutable on rec 5.2 In view of the ab the impugned order the file of the Ld. CIT consider the submis application in accor opportunity of being whether, at the stage to the genuineness mandated under Se application of income 5.3 Accordingly, th 4147/Mum/2025 are T ITA Nos.
in the submission that befor
Section 13(1)(c) of the Act as tion, the principles of natural j e granted a fair and adequate edly, the order passed by the opportunity having been grante lication of funds for the bene ropriate cases, be more appropr proceedings rather than at the Section 12AB, unless such vio cord.
bove, we consider it just and pro dated 21.03.2023 and remand
T(E) for fresh adjudication. The ssions of the assessee afresh rdance with law, after affordi g heard. The Ld. CIT(E) shal e of registration, the inquiry sho of the objects and activities ection 12AB, and whether iss e fall outside the scope of registr e grounds raised by the asses e allowed for statistical purpose
Tejibai Educational Society
6
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
re invoking the s a ground for justice required e opportunity of Ld. CIT(E) does ed. Further, the efit of specified riately examined threshold stage olation is glaring oper to set aside d the matter to Ld. CIT(E) shall and decide the ing an effective ll also consider ould be confined of the trust as sues relating to ration.
ssee in ITA No.
s.
The appeal in IT rejection order dated of the assessee seeki filed as revised appli period allowed by th rejected as not main appeal of the assess for seeking regular r No. 4147/Mum/2025 adjudicated and ren the assessee is dismi 7. In the result No.4147/Mum/2025 the appeal in ITA No. Order pronoun (ANIKESH BA JUDICIAL M Mumbai; Dated: 30/06/2025 Dragon Legal/Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. T ITA Nos.
TA No. 1044/Mum/2025 has be d 17/12/2024, wherein the ano ing registration under section 1
ication under the extended win he Central Board of Direct Tax ntainable. Since we have alrea ee against rejection of the orig registration while adjudicating t
5, thus the present appeal is no dered infructuous. Accordingly ssed as infructuous.
t, the appeal of the ass
5 is allowed for statistical pur
1044/Mum/2025 is dismissed ced in the open Court on 30/0
/-
S
ANERJEE)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA
Tejibai Educational Society
7
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
een filed against ther application
12AB of the Act, ndow of the time xes (CBDT), was ady restored the ginal application the appeal in IT ot required to be y, this appeal of sessee in ITA rposes, whereas
.
06/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
T
ITA Nos.
ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu
Tejibai Educational Society
8
. 1044 & 4147/MUM/2025
R, gistrar) umbai