Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders rejecting their applications for registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G. The rejection was primarily due to the failure to submit a copy of the regular registration granted earlier under Section 12AB, which was considered a prerequisite for the current application.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(E) and restored the issue to the CIT's file. The assessee was directed to provide the necessary details to substantiate its case, and the CIT(E) was instructed to decide the applications afresh on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G for non-submission of a copy of the previous regular registration, and if restoring the matter for fresh consideration is appropriate.
Sections Cited
12A, 80G, 12AB
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
आयकर अपील सं. / & 771/PUN/2025 Niranjan Avhad Foundation CIT (Exemptions), Pune for the Disabled, Abhijt Nagar, Hirawadi, Vs. Nashik-422003 PAN : AACTN7751M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 15-07-2025 Date of 28-07-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER
PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :
The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders both dated 14.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune (“CIT(E)”) rejecting the application(s) for grant of registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). For the sake of convenience, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
Both the appeals have been filed with a delay of 112 days. 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, we condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeals.
In Ld. CIT (E) in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act while relates to the order of the Ld. CIT(E) in denying the approval u/s 80G of the Act.
Facts of the case in Form No.10AB on 29.03.2024 for registration of the trust under sub-clause (ii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. 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 by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued through ITBA portal on 23.05.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/ clarification. The assessee was asked to file compliance by 07.06.2024. In response thereto, the assessee filed the requisite details. The Ld. CIT(E) while going through those details and documents filed along with the application, found certain discrepancies for which he issued another notice on 30.07.2024 seeking compliance by 07.08.2024. The said discrepancies recorded by the Ld. CIT(E) in para 4 of the impugned order is reproduced below: “On verification of records and details furnished by you, it is seen that you are not having regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act under clause (i) or (iii) of the Act. Further, it is noticed from the CPC 2.0 Portal that you have obtained provisional registration under sub-clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. Therefore, the prerequisite for application under sub-clause (ii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act is not fulfilled in your case."
4.1 The assessee furnished its reply to the above notice submitting the requite documents/ detail, however, after verifying the same, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act for the reason that the assessee has not submitted a copy of the regular registration granted earlier under section 12AB of the Act by observing as under: “7. The present application is filed by the assessee under clause (ii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provisions of clause (ii) of section 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.
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. However, the assessee has neither submitted the same along with the application nor in response to the notice issued in this regard. Thus the assessee failed to furnish the same. 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 (i) or clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The non-submission of copy of order of regular registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 establishes the fact that the prerequisite for application under clause (ii) of Section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not fulfilled in this case. Therefore, prima-facie it appears that the application is not maintainable.
10. 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 with such order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:
1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT, Exemption erred in rejecting the registration asked u/s 12AB of the IT Act for the reason that trust has not submitted the copy of earlier approval u/s. 12AB. Your appellant submits that necessary details are available and can be submitted and therefore appellant prays before this Hon’ble Bench for restoring the matter back to the file of CIT (Exemption) for reconsideration of the application made in form no. 10AB, and to submit the copy of such order. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing.
6. Admittedly, the facts of the case in are similar to that of narrated above. Similar grounds have been raised in ITA No. 771/PUN/2025 which read as under:
1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT, Exemption erred in rejecting the registration asked u/s 80(G)(5) of the IT Act for the reason that trust has not submitted the copy of earlier approval u/s. 80G. Your appellant submits that necessary details are available and can be submitted and therefore appellant prays before this Hon’ble Bench for restoring the matter back to the file of CIT (Exemption) for reconsideration of the application made in form no. 10AB, and to submit the copy of such order. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing.
It is the submission of the Ld. AR that since the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier, he refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act.
8. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee in response to the first notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) filed various details. Further, the assessee also submitted its response providing clarification on the discrepancies pointed out by the Ld. CIT(E) in the second notice. But the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee’s application without appreciating the facts of the assessee’s case in correct perspective. He submitted that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(E).
9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld CIT(E).
We have heard Ld. Representatives of the parties, perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee duly filed its response to the notice(s) issued by the Ld. CIT(E), however, he rejected the application(s) of the assessee for the reasons reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. The assessee’s application for grant of approval u/s 80G has also been rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) on the similar grounds. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case enumerated above and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper, to set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(E) and restore the issue(s) to his file with a direction to grant an opportunity to the assessee to explain and substantiate its case to his satisfaction by filing the requisite details as may be required/ called upon and decide the applications of the assessee afresh on merits as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the details as called for by the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, 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 in both the appeals are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals in & 771/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.