OM SAI RAM CHARITABLE TRUST,CHHATRAPATI SAMBHAJI NAGAR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, AURANGABAD, CHHATRAPATI SAMBHAJI NAGAR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1547/PUN/2025

Om Sai Ram Charitable
Trust,
‘Mangalam’
Near
Youth
Hostel,
Vishrambaug
Colony,
Padampura,
Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar,
Maharashtra- 431001. PAN : AAATO8659H
Vs.
CIT, Exemption, Pune.
Appellant

Respondent

आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.04.2025 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for approval u/s 80G(5) of the IT Act.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee filed its application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act on 19.11.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of Assessee by : Shri Alok R. Singh (Virtual)
Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Jha

Date of hearing
: 13.10.2025
Date of pronouncement : 30.10.2025
2
the assessee and fulfilment of conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the Act, notices were issued through
ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification. The assessee in response to above notices furnished desired information as mentioned in the notices.
After verifying these details, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune dismissed the application for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act by observing as under :-
“7.2 Without prejudice to the above, it is seen that the date of expiry of provisional approval under section 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in the instant case is 31/03/2025. As per the provisions of clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, where a trust or institution has been provisionally approved under section 80G(5)(iv) of the Act, the application for regular approval under section 80G(5)(iv) is required to be filed, at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional approval or within six months from the date of commencement of activities, whichever is earlier. Since, the period of provisional approval was due to expire on 31/03/2025, the present application was required to be filed before 30/09/2024. However, the present application filed is on 19/11/2024 i.e. after the expiry of period allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. Thus, it is seen that the assessee did not filed the present application within the time limit allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. In view of the above, the present application filed in Form
No.10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is liable to be rejected without going into the merits since the assessee has not filed the present application within the time limit allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961. 9. In view of the above, the application dated 19/11/2024 filed by the assessee in Form 10AB is hereby rejected without going into the merits of the case.”
3
3. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
4. Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune is not justified. Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee was provisionally approved u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act upto 31.03.2025
and was supposed to apply for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act prior to six months from the expiry of provisional approval i.e. on or before 30.09.2024. Accordingly, the assessee applied for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act on 28.09.2024 i.e. well within the time limit. However, the assessee withdrew the above application on 19.11.2024 since due to an inadvertent typing error wrong section code was selected. Ld. AR further submitted that on the same day i.e. on 19.11.2024 itself the assessee again furnished a fresh application for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act wherein correct section code was selected. Ld. AR submitted that under the above facts of the case Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune ought to have condoned the delay and should have decided the application on merits of the case. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune
4
and further requested to direct Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune to consider the application on merits of the case.
5. Ld. DR appearing from side of the Revenue relied on the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and requested to confirm the same.
6. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that admittedly the provisional approval was valid upto 31.03.2025 and the assessee was required to file application for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act prior to six months from the expiry of the provisional approval i.e. on or before 30.09.2024. We further find that the assessee filed an application for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act on 28.09.2024
but the same was withdrawn by the assessee on 19.11.2024 since due to typographical error wrong section code was selected. We also find that the assessee immediately after withdrawing the original application on 19.11.2024 again furnished the impugned application for final approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act under correct section code. We further find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected the impugned application on the ground of apparent delay.
5
However, we also find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has neither considered the fact of filing of original application on 28.09.2024
nor considered the fact of withdrawal of the same due to wrong section code.
7. In view of our above discussion, we find some force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the original application was filed within the time limit prescribed under the Act and Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune ought to have taken this fact into consideration before rejecting the new application without going into merits of the case.
8. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and remand the issue back to his file with a direction to condone the delay and decide the application for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to comply with the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and produce requisite documents/information in support of the application for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act without taking any adjournment under any 6
pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of October, 2025. (R. K. PANDA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 30th October, 2025. Sujeet
आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune.
4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned.
5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.

////
Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.