Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's application for final approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) was rejected by the CIT(E) due to delay in filing Form 10AB, despite the CIT(E) having previously condoned an identical delay for the assessee's Section 12A registration. The assessee had been granted provisional approval earlier. The CIT(E) stated he had no power to condone the delay for Section 80G registration.
Held
Citing a Madras High Court judgment that found the CBDT's selective refusal to extend time limits for Section 80G registration arbitrary, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(E). The CIT(E) was directed to reconsider the Section 80G application, treating it as timely, given that the reasons for delay were identical to those accepted for Section 12A approval and pass order on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the Section 80G final approval application for delay, especially when delay for Section 12A approval was condoned, and in light of judicial precedents regarding condonation of delay for 80G registration.
Sections Cited
80G(5)(iii), 80G(5)(iv), 12A, 10(23C), 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. 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 & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2026-27 Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa….….……….……Appellant Block-A-11, 4th Floor, 234/3A AJC Bose Road, Kol - 700020. [PAN: AAETS8043F] vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sanjeev Kadel, CA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 10, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : September 12, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.06.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’] rejecting the application of the assessee for final approval as per the provisions of section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had been granted provisions provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in Form No.10AC for a period from A.Y 2023-24 to A.Y 2025-26. An application for final approval of the trust u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act was filed on 05.12.2024 in Form No.10AB. Thereafter, a notice was issued to the assessee requesting therein to furnish details on the activities carried out by the assessee and in response to the said notice, the assessee filed certain details/documents before the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) rejected Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa the application filed in Form 10AB on the ground that Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB for registration u/s 80G after due date.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee filed the present appeal before us. The ld. AR challenges the impugned order thereby submitting that the assessee has already granted application for regular approval u/s 12A by the ld. CIT(E) by condoning the delay of in filing Form 10AB but the ld. CIT(E) rejected the same in granting registration u/s 80G also filed in Form No.10AB by stating that he has no power condone the delay. The ld. AR cited a decision passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras vs. CBDT reported in [2024] 161 taxmann.com 209 (Madras). The ld. AR has submitted that when regular application for granting registration u/s 12A has been accepted by condoning the delay, and there being no change in the reasons cited in the condonation petition in granting regular registration u/s 80G of the Act, the ld. CIT(E) ought to have been considered the same likewise.
Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order.
Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, the following facts have been emerged:
(a) the assessee has filed an applied for approval u/s 12A for registration on 31.01.2023 and provisional registration has been granted on 28.02.2023.
(b) the assessee has filed application for regular approval u/s 12A in Form NO.10AB and the approval had been granted.
(c) the assessee has filed an application for approval of registration u/s 80G on 02.03.2023 and the provisional approval has been granted on 09.03.2023 Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa (d) the assessee has filed application for regular approval u/s 80G on 05.12.2024 in Form No.10AB with condonation of delay and reasons for such delay are identical as filed u/s 12A but the same has been rejected by the ld. CIT(E).
5.1 Having gone through the judgment cited by the ld. AR, we find that in the aforesaid judgment, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras has allowed a writ petition by holding as under:
“Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Donation to certain funds, charitable institutions, etc. (Approval under sub-section (5)) - CBDT, vide Circular No. 8 of 2022 dated 31-3-2022, extended time limit with respect to both existing trusts and new trusts for registrations under sections 10(23C), 12A and 80G(5) - However, CBDT, while extending time limit further vide impugned Clause 5 (ii) of Circular No. 6 of 2023, dated 24-5-2023, did not grant extension to new trusts for filing forms for application of registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) - However, revenue could not provide any rationale for such a classification - Even though new trusts as well as existing trusts had no right to demand for extension of time as a matter of right, when revenue had thought it fit to extend time, considering hardship, there was no material placed before Court, nor any reasoning as contained in impugned order that new trusts did not face hardship in respect of filing of application under section 80G(5) alone- Further, leaving out clause in respect of section 80G(5) alone, that too only in respect of new trusts did not in any manner relate to object sought to be achieved by impugned circular nor did it provide any basis for discrimination/classification - Differential treatment was not based on any substantial distinction that was real and pertinent to object of circular - Whether therefore, impugned clause 5(ii) of circular No. 6/2023, dated 24-5-2023 was arbitrary and violative of article 14 of Constitution of India and accordingly, would be ultra vires Constitution - Held, yes [Paras 6.7 and 7] [In favour of assessee]” 5.2 Keeping in view the above facts and considering the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee before the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application submitted by the petitioner for registration u/s 80G as within time as the petitioner has already filed condonation petition in granting application u/s 12A and reasons for the delay were Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa identical. The ld. CIT(E) will consider the application for condonation in granting registration u/s 80G and pass order on merits.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 12th September, 2025.