SOLAPUR ORTHOPEDIC SOCIETY,SOLAPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1474/PUN/2025

Solapur Orthopedic Society,
8374/A, Nathwalai, Daffrin
Chowk,
Railway
Lines,
Solapur- 413001. PAN : AAHTS6934L
Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune.
Appellant

Respondent

आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.04.2025 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee has applied for registration in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the IT Act on 04.10.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are Assessee by : Miss Kimya Kudva
Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde

Date of hearing
: 14.07.2025
Date of pronouncement : 29.07.2025
2
material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued on 27.11.2024 through ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload various information detailed in notice. In compliance to the above notice, desired information was furnished by the assessee trust. Subsequently, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found that the application was furnished u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the IT Act which is not applicable to the assessee since deduction u/s 11 was claimed by the assessee. After considering the reply, Ld. CIT, Exemption,
Pune rejected the application filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
3. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted that the rejection 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. 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 3
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 ITA No.1553/Del/2024
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 him 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.
5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record and also copy of case laws relied on by the assessee. 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
4
under clause (vi) 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.
10. 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.”

पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 29th July, 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, “B” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.

////
Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.