Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act was rejected by the CIT(E) for being filed under the wrong section and for not furnishing a copy of a regular registration order. The assessee contended that it was an inadvertent mistake and requested the application be considered under the correct section.
Held
The Tribunal held that a wrong selection of a section code should not be fatal to the proceedings. Relying on previous decisions, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and restored the matter to the CIT(E)'s file.
Key Issues
Whether rejection of an application for registration under Section 12A solely on the ground of using a wrong section code, despite a request for correction, is justified.
Sections Cited
12A, 12A(1)(ac), 12A(1)(ac)(ii), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB, 12AB(1)(b)(i), 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, “A” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
आदेश / ORDER
PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :
The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.04.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 31.10.2023 in Form No. 10AB under sub-clause (ii) of clause (ac) of sub- section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”).
There is a delay of 305 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay which is mainly because of technical issues on e-filing portal and then health condition of the consultant. On perusal of the same, we are satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal is not intentional or deliberate but has occurred for the reasons mentioned in the affidavit. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339, condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions & scheme of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') it be kindly held that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-Exemptions ['CIT(E)'], Pune, rejecting the Appellants application for seeking regular registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) is against the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) be held as not tenable in law and be set aside directing the Ld. CIT(E) to grant registration. The appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect.
2. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions & scheme of the Act it be kindly held that the Appellant is eligible for getting registration in clause (iii) of sec. 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. Accordingly, the rejection order passed be kindly set aside and Ld. CIT(E) be kindly directed to consider the application under respective clause. The appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect.
3. The appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete, raise any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”
4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 12.01.2024 through ITBA portal which was duly served on the assessee requesting the assessee to upload certain other information/clarification such as self-certified copy of order of regular registration under section 12AB in form No.10AC, date of such approval, date of expiry of such approval, proof of identity of main trustees/directors, year- wise list of donations received, note on activities carried out along with supporting credible evidence, details of any other law applicable for achievement of objectives and proof of compliance of said law, details of business undertakings etc. under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Act. The compliance was sought by 29.01.2024. On verification of the details/documents submitted by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application of the assessee as non- maintainable without going into the merits of the case and drawing no adverse inference against the assessee on the ground that the impugned application has been filed under the wrong section code by observing as under : “5. The present application is filed by the assessee under clause (s) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provisions of clause (ii 12A(1)(ac) are related to application for renewal of regular registration of a trust or institution which is already having regular registration under section 12AB of the Act and the period of said registration is about to expire 6. The assessee was specifically requested vide the initial notice to furnish the copy of order of regular registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Such copy is actually required to be furnished along with the application itself under the provisions of Rule 17A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The copy of order submitted by the assessee is a copy of provisional registration under section 12AB read with clause (vi) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and not a copy of regular registration under section 12AB read with clause (1) or clause (ii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In reply to the notice, the assessee has admitted the fact. Thus, in the assessee's case, the prerequisite for application under clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not fulfilled. Therefore, prima-facie it appears that the application is not maintainable.
7. In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is treated as non- maintainable and hence, 'rejected for statistical purposes without going into the merits of the case and no adverse inference is drawn against the assessee.”
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.
The Ld. AR at the outset submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application for registration under section 12A of the Act solely on the ground that the assessee has used wrong section code in filing the same i.e. section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. He submitted that this mistake has happened inadvertently by the assessee which was duly brought to the attention of the Ld. CIT(E) vide letter dated 07.02.2024 (pages 2 to 5 of the Paper Book refers) requesting him to consider the application as filed under the correct section code but still the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application. He submitted that the Pune Tribunal in catena of decisions has set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application afresh as filed under the correct clause. In support thereof, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision(s) of the coordinate bench of the Pune Tribunal in the case of – i. Help For Children In Need Foundation Vs. CIT(E), Pune (ITA No. 1774/PUN/2024; ii. Social Networking Forum Vs CIT(E) Pune, (ITA No.932/PUN/2025); and iii. Torna Rajgad Parisar Samajonnati Nyas Vs. CIT(E), Pune (ITA No. 2295/PUN/2024).
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). He, however, brought to our attention that there is a technical difficulty on the part of the Ld. CIT(E) to treat and dispose off the assessee’s application as filed under the correct section code as per the directions of the Tribunal and hence the assessee may be directed to file the fresh application with the correct clause.
We have heard the heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties, perused the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee and as well as the judicial precedent relied upon by the Ld. AR. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application merely on ground of selection of wrong section code and failure on the part of the assessee to furnish a copy of the regular registration u/s 12AB of the Act read with clause (i)/(iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. Admittedly these facts are not in dispute.
We find that the impugned issue is covered in favour of the assessee by catena of decisions of the various benches of the Tribunal involving similar set of facts as that of the assessee in the present appeal. In our view, wrong selection of section code/clause would not disentitle the assessee to its rightful claim and cannot be treated as fatal to the proceedings initiated after the filing of the application. The case of the assessee finds support by the decision(s) (supra) of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Pune Tribunal wherein the Tribunal under the similar fact pattern as that of the assessee in the instant appeal, has remanded the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the same afresh with a direction to treat the application already filed by the assessee as filed under the correct section code. It is, however, worthwhile to note the concern of the Ld. DR that there are certain technical difficulties faced by the Ld. CIT(E) in treating and disposing off the assessee’s application as filed under the correct section code.
Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case and legal position enumerated above, we deem it fit and proper, to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to treat the application for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act as filed under the correct section code and decide it afresh as per fact and law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Having said so, in the light of the above concern of the Ld. DR, we also direct that the Ld. CIT(E) shall give an opportunity to the assessee to file the correct application, if needed and condone the delay/ limitation, if any in filing of the fresh application or allow the assessee to rectify the application and then decide the same on merits denovo. The assessee is also hereby directed to remain vigilant and make his submissions on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext unless required for the sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order(s) as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th July, 2025.