Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer rejected the application on the grounds that the cited provision (12A(1)(ac)(ii)) was applicable only for renewal of registration for trusts already registered for 5 years. The Assessee claimed this was an inadvertent error and the correct provision should have been 12A(1)(ac)(iii).
Held
The Tribunal held that the mistake in mentioning the section was an inadvertent or typographical error. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration application due to incorrect citation of a sub-section under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on an inadvertent error, is justifiable.
Sections Cited
12AA, 12A, 12A(1)(ac)(ii), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 10AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & MS. PADMAVATHY S
Assessee by : Shri Manish Ranka, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Shri Surendra Meena, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 30 . 01 .2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24 . 02.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 05.09.2024, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2022-23.
M/s. Jinshashan Rajendra Charitable Trust 2. In the instant case, the Assessee’s application filed for registration u/s 12A of the Act in the form No.10AB has been rejected by the Ld. Commissioner on the ground that the application filed by the Assessee u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act is valid only for the trust already having registered for 5 years and seeking renewal of regular registration, which is due to expire.
The Assessee has challenged the impugned order and has claimed that the Assessee inadvertently or overlooking the facts in Form No.10AB, recorded the applicable provisions of the Act as 12A (1)(ac)(ii) instead of mentioning the correct provision i.e. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
The Ld. D.R. did not refute the said aspects.
Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the mentioning of section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of correct provision i.e. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in the Application for registration Form No.10AB, as an inadvertent or typographical mistake, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on the application filed by the Assessee u/s 10AB of the Act by treating the said application as filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act instead of u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.02.2025.