Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee applied for registration under Section 12AB of the IT Act but filed the application under the wrong section code due to a typographical error. The CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the application solely on this technical ground.
Held
The Tribunal held that mentioning the wrong section code is a curable defect and the CIT erred in rejecting the application based on a technicality. The appeal was allowed.
Key Issues
Whether rejection of registration application for a technical error in mentioning the wrong section code is justified.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B), 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
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, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.12.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee applied for registration in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the IT Act on 29.06.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirement of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued through ITBA portal on 05.08.2024 requesting the assessee to upload various information detailed in notice. In compliance to the above notice, desired information was furnished by the assessee trust. Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found that the application was furnished u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the IT Act instead of u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the IT Act. Thus, the application filed by the assessee trust was rejected by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted that the rejection of order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune is unjustified. It was submitted that due to a typographical/inadvertent error the application was filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) whereas the assessee was required to file application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the IT Act. It was further submitted that application was filed by its own without help of any tax professional and due to this the above mistake occurred. Ld. AR also relied on the CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 wherein issue of wrong section code was considered and it was directed to consider those applications as good if filed before 30.06.2024. Accordingly, it was prayed before the Bench that mentioning of wrong code in the application is curable defect and Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune, should have had accepted the request of the assessee to treat the application as filed under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act. In support of the above contention, Ld. AR relied on the decision passed by Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust vs. CIT, [2024] 162 taxmann.com 772 (Surat-Trib.) order dated 13.05.2024 wherein under identical situation Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee. Ld. AR further relied on another decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust in order dated 05.06.2024, wherein under similar circumstances, the Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set- aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and further requested to direct Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune to consider the application as filed under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act.
4. Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue relied on the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and requested to confirm the same.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find that admittedly, the assessee trust was required to file application under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act but due to inadvertent error the application was filed under clause (vi)(B) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act and for this reason alone Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected its application for registration. We find that under identical situations, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust (supra) allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under :- “9. As contended the appellant has committed a technical mistake in making the application under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. As pointed out the appellant has filed revised form 10AB for seeking registration under the correct provision i.e. Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) which can also be considered.
In consonance with the decision rendered by the co-ordinate Bench, the typographical error deserves to be corrected. Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be allowed and impugned order dated 15.03.2024 of Ld. CIT (E) is liable to be set aside. Hence, the appeal is allowed and we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(E) dated 15-03-2024 and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication by considering amended application of the appellant under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, or he can call for amended application from the appellant.
11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.”
Respectfully following the above decision passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal (supra), and in the light of CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 wherein applications filed under wrong section code were directed to be considered as filed under correct section code, we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune erred in dismissing the application for registration merely on a technical ground of wrong section code.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and without going into merits of the case, we deem it proper to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and direct Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune to treat the application already filed by the assessee as under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act instead of under clause (vi)(B) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act and decide the same afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT,