BAL HANUMAN MANDIR,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

The grounds of appeal are as under:- “(1) The order of the CIT(E) subsequent to the directions of the Tribunal is barred by limitation. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and under the law, the learned CIT(E) was not justified in rejecting application u/s.12A. (3) The appellant having complied with the directions of the Tribunal in the first round, the learned CIT(E) should have granted registration u/s. 12A.

The assessee has made an application u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking registration vide application dated 19-08-2022. The said application was rejected vide order dated 27-02-2023. Against the said order, the applicant filed an appeal before the Tribunal and vide order 17-07-2023, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the file of the CIT(E). The CIT(E) observed that the assessee was granted provisional approval in Form 10AC under sub-section (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A on 10-03-2022 from assessment year 2022-23. The assessee was called upon to file certain details and the applicant submitted re-drafted trust deed before the CIT(E). The CIT(E) rejected the application on the ground that the assessee submitted only re-drafted trust deed which was not approved by the Charity Commissioner and hence could not verify the activity. The applicant filed the present appeal before the Tribunal on the ground that the same issue was raised in first round vide notice dated 17.10.2022 and was accepted and the issue which was already been reviewed and accepted was again taken into consideration and rejected on the very same ground by the CIT(E). The ld. A.R. pointed out that the activities

The ld. D.R. relied upon the order of the CIT(E).

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the applicant was carrying out the activities as per the audited financials which are identical to that of the objects mentioned in the PTR as well as in the redrafted trust deed. From the perusal of the redrafted deed, the object are not restricted to one particular community only but for all communities without any discrimination based on caste, creed, gender or religion. The CIT(E) could not point out from the financials that the expenditure was incurred for specific community only and not to the general public at large. Thus, it will be appropriate to allow the application of the trust for registration u/s. 12AB. Thus, the rejection is not justifiable and the plea of the applicant is allowed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the applicant/appellant is allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 02.04.2026