ST. THOMAS SYRO MALABAR CATHOLIC CHURCH,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1567/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 December 2025AY 2023-20247 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 615 days in filing the appeal, finding the reasons cited by the assessee to be bona fide and genuine, relying on the precedents mentioned by the assessee. Regarding the additional ground, the Tribunal admitted it for adjudication as it involved a purely legal issue with all facts available. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was registered under Section 12AA prior to the amendment and was eligible for registration under Section 12AB(1)(ac)(vi) for five years from AY 2021-22 to 2025-26. However, the CIT (E) had granted provisional registration only from AY 2021-22 to 2023-24. The Tribunal directed the CIT (E) to allow registration from AY 2021-22 to 2025-26, allowing the first issue raised in the additional grounds. For the second issue, the Tribunal acknowledged the inadvertent filing of Form 10AB for AY 2023-24 when provisional registration was already valid till that year. The Tribunal quashed the Form 10AB filed on 05.03.2023 for AY 2023-24 and the consequent order in Form 10AD dated 11.09.2023, allowing the second issue in the additional grounds. The original grounds of appeal were dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, St. Thomas Syro Malabar Catholic Church, filed an appeal before the ITAT, Kolkata, against an order dated 11.09.2023 passed by the CIT (Exemption), Kolkata. The appeal was filed 615 days beyond the prescribed limitation period. The assessee explained this delay by stating that their Chartered Accountant, who handled all income-tax matters, failed to inform them about the order rejecting their application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee only became aware of this rejection when they inquired about a pending registration for Assessment Year (AY) 2025-26. The assessee also raised an additional ground regarding an inadvertent filing of Form 10AB for AY 2023-24 when they already had provisional registration till AY 2023-24.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 615 days in filing the appeal against the order of the CIT (Exemption) should be condoned on the grounds of bona fide reasons, specifically the non-communication of the order by the assessee's Chartered Accountant. The assessee relied on the decisions in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT, DIT(E) vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission, and Pawan Kumar Jain vs. DCIT. The revenue objected to condoning the delay, arguing that the reasons cited were not reasonable. 2. Whether the application filed in Form 10AB for AY 2023-24, which was inadvertently filed when the assessee already had provisional registration till AY 2023-24, should be treated as withdrawn and the consequent order in Form 10AD passed by the CIT (E) should be quashed. The assessee argued that this was a mistake and they were not required to file Form 10AB for AY 2023-24. The revenue's contentions are not recorded on this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA,Section 12A,Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi),Section 12AB(1)(ac)(vi),Section 254(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Hearing: 01.12.2025Pronounced: 23.12.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 11.09.2023.

2.

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the is barred by limitation by 615 days, for which the assessee filed condonation petition along with an affidavit, which read as under:-

“1. That St. Thomas Syro Malabar Catholic Church started activities from August, 2016 is a trust and holding exemption certificate u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act dated 03.10.2019 and provisional registration u/s 12A of the Act uptill A.Y. 2023-24. The trust is created for charitable purposes with the objectives to provide relief to the poor, education, medical relief, preservation of nature and advancement of any other object of public utility.

2.2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and , hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

3.

At the time of hearing, the counsel of the assessee raised additional ground which is extracted as under:-

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee trust inadvertently filled From 10AB for A.Y. 2023-24 on 05.03.2023 instead of A.Y. 2024-25 for registration u/s 12A of the Act although the assessee trust was duly accorded provisional registration till A.Y. 2023-24 vide order dated 27.05.2021 and thus was no required to file Form 10AB for A.Y. 2023-24, accordingly the said Form 10AB filed by the assessee may kindly be treated as withdrawn and consequent order in Form 10AD passed by the learned CIT (E), Kolkata may kindly quashed.

3.1. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal and requested that Form 10AB filed by the assessee may kindly be treated as withdrawn and consequent order in Form 10AD passed by the learned CIT (E) may be quashed. In our opinion the

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessee was registered u/s 12AA of the Act from A.Y. 2020-21 on 03.10.2019. The assessee filed an application in form no.10A for provisional registration on 23.03.2021. The said application of the assessee was treated by the Department as application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act and thereby allowed provisional registration u/s 12A of the Act in form 10AC on 27.05.2021 from A.Y. 2021-22 to A.Y. 2023-24. The assessee filed form 10AB for A.Y. 2024-25 onwards for registration u/s 12A of the Act, since, it was already registered u/s 12A of the Act till A.Y. 2023- 24. Inadvertently the assessee again filed registration application u/s 12A of the Act for A.Y. 2023-24 on 05.03.2023. The said application was inadvertent mistake at the time of choosing the assessment year while filing the form no.10AB on 05.03.2023. Accordingly, proceedings u/s 12A of the Act was initiated by CIT (E), Kolkata and notices were issued through ITBA portal. The notices were not ““(a) Firstly, the assessee trust was already registered u/s 12AA before its amendment by Taxation and Other Laws Act 2020, therefore the assessee was required to make application in Form 10A under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) within three months from 01.04.2021 and was eligible for registration for a period of 5 Years i.e. from A.Y. 2021- 22 to 2025-26. However, the application of the assessee was treated by the department as an application u/s12A(1)(ac) (vi) and the assessee was allowed provisional registration u/s 12A of the Act in Form 10AC on 27-05-2021 from AY 2021- 22 to AY 2023-24 which was not as per law.

(b) Secondly the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application filed in Form No 10AB on 05.03.2023 in limie without verifying the records that the assessee was already allowed registration for the assessment year 2023-24, therefore the assessee application in Form 10AB filed on 05.03.2023 for AY 2023-24 and its consequent order in Form 10AD dated 11.09.2023by the Ld. CIT(E) be quashed.” 4.1. So far as the first issue is concerned, we observe that the assessee is already registered before amendment by Taxation and Other Laws Act 2020 and so the assessee was eligible for registration u/s 12AB(1)(ac)vi) of the Act for a period of five years from A.Y. 2021-22 to 2025-26 as against the registration allowed for three years by ld. CIT from A.Y. 2021-22 to 2023-24. Therefore, we direct the ld. CIT (E) to allow the registration from A.Y. 2021-22 to 2025- 26. Consequently, the first issue raised in additional grounds is allowed.

4.2. So far as the second issue in additional ground is concerned, we note that the assessee inadvertently filed the form 10AB of the Act for A.Y. 2023-24 on 05.03.2023, instead of 2024-25 for registration of 12A of the Act. Although, it was not required to do so as it was duly accorded provisional registration till A.Y. 2023-24 vide order

4.3. Considering these facts and circumstances of the case and the sprayers of the assessee, we quash the from 10AB of the Act filed on 05.03.2023, for A.Y. 2023-24 and consequent order passed in form 10AD of the Act dated 11.09.2023. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of Sawansukha foundation Vs. CIT in & 2155/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 08.01.2025, in which according to the Bench held as under:-

4. We have perused the impugned orders and heard the rival submissions at length. In this matter, the facts are clear in as much as the assessee has a valid registration for AY 2024-25 in both the cases. It is also clear that inadvertently a fresh application filed for the year 2024-25 got rejected in an ex-parte manner. Since, there is a valid registration available with the assessee for AY 2024-25, in both the cases, the action of Ld. CIT(E) cannot be sustained in principle. However, while giving the effect to this appellate order, the Ld. CIT(E) is directed to verify the existence of valid registrations in both the cases for AY 2024-25 and thereafter, allow the registration to continue for AY 2024-25 as per the original order granting such registration.

4.4. Accordingly, we allow the second issue in the additional grounds.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.12.2025.

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →