Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, filed an application for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application because the assessee used the wrong section code (clause (ii)) in Form 10AB instead of the correct one (clause (iii)), despite having a provisional approval.
Held
The Tribunal held that the erroneous selection of a section code is not a fatal mistake and should not disentitle the assessee to its rightful claim. Following previous decisions, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of an application for approval under Section 80G solely on the grounds of selecting the wrong clause in the application form is justified?
Sections Cited
80G, 10AB, 11AA(2)(e)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
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 04.10.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 20.04.2024 in Form No. 10AB under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”).
2. The assessee has filed this appeal with a delay of 51 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with a sworn affidavit stating therein the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. 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, condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust registered under Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 on 20.07.1970. The assessee trust was registered u/s 12A by Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune on 01.05.2008 with effect from 01.04.2007. The assessee sought re- registration under new scheme and was also granted provisional registration on 08.02.2022. On receipt of assessee’s application along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and fulfillment of conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice through ITBA portal on 04.06.2024 which was duly served on the assessee through e-portal and email, requesting the assessee to upload certain other information/clarification viz. self-certified copy of order of regular approval u/s 80G(5) 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 religious objectives, details of expenses on religious objectives, details of income from profits and gains of business, details of provisions of trust deed / MoA for transfer or application of income for any purpose other than charitable purposes etc. in order to ascertain the overall nature of the activities of the assessee. Compliance to the said notice was due by 19.06.2024. On verification of the details/documents submitted by the assessee in response to thereto, the Ld. CIT(E) observed few discrepancies which were communicated to the assessee by issue of another notice on 16.08.2024 served via email/e- portal seeking compliance by 23.08.2024. The said discrepancies are as under: "On verification of records and details furnished by you, it is seen that you are not having regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act under clause (i) or (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. Further, it is noticed from the CPC 2.0 Portal that you have obtained provisional approval under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. Therefore, the prerequisite for application under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is not fulfilled in your case." 3.1 The assessee failed to provide its response by the due date to the above discrepancy noted by the Ld. CIT(A) who then issued one more notice on 23.09.2024, seeking compliance by 30.09.2024. On assessee’s failure to file its reply once again, the Ld. CIT proceeded to pass the impugned based on the details/documents submitted by the assessee along with its application observing as under: “7. However, on verification of the details / documents submitted by the assessee along with its application, it is seen that the assessee has not furnished the copy of REGULAR APPROVAL in form No. 10AC under section 80G(5)(vi) read with clause (i) or clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 but submitted a copy of PROVISIONAL APPROVAL under section 80G(5)(vi) read with clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
8. The present application is filed by the assessee under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provisions of clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G are related to application for renewal of regular approval of a trust or institution which is already having regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act and the period of said registration is about to expire.
9. The assessee was specifically requested vide the initial notice to furnish the copy of order of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Such copy is actually required to be furnished along with the application itself under the provisions of Rule 11AA(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 along with the present application is a copy of provisional approval under section 80G(5)(vi) read with clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and not a copy of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) read with clause (i) or clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The non-submission of copy of order of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 establishes the fact that the prerequisite for application under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not fulfilled in this case. Therefore, prima-facie it appears that the application is not maintainable. 11. 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 Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:
“1. The assessee prays to condone the delay of 60 days in filing the present appeal for the reasons beyond its control. The assessee begs to submit an affidavit at the time of hearing.
On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Pune, is not justified in rejecting the approval on the basis of non-submission of documents like regular approval by the assessee. The application should have been filed u/c (iii) of the proviso to sec 80G(5)(vi) as against inadvertently / by mistake the assessee sought approval u/c (ii) of the proviso to sec 80G(5)(vi). The application for registration u/s 80G(5)(ii) be restored by setting aside his order dt 04/10/2024.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the application filed for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) solely on the ground that the assessee has used wrong section code while e-filing in Form 10AB. The mistake has happened inadvertently by the assessee and the same is not fatal denying the registration of a charitable trust. In support of this proposition, he placed reliance on the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Raj Krishna Jain Charitable Trust (ITA no. 1553/Del/2024) and in the case of Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust (2024) 162 taxmann.com 772 (Surat).
5.1 The Ld. AR further relied on the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Datar Kulmandal Vs. CIT (ITA No. 1052/PUN/2024) dated 27.02.2025 and in the case of Shree Hari Kirtanottejak Sabha (ITA No. 2649/PUN/2024) dated 28.05.2025 wherein the Tribunal under the similar set of facts has the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the issue afresh considering the application filed by the assessee as filed under the correct section code. He therefore requested that the order of the Ld. CIT(E) may be set aside with a direction to treat decide the matter afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E).
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 various judicial precedents relied upon by the Ld. AR. The facts of the case are not in dispute. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application on account of selection of wrong section code by the assessee while e-filing Form 10AB. The main grievance of the assessee agitated in this appeal is the selection of wrong section code by the assessee in its application for regular registration other than Clause (ii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. We find that this issue is no more res-integra and 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. Support may be drawn from the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case Help For Children In Need Foundation Vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune in dated 09.12.2024 wherein the order of the Ld. CIT(E) has been set aside with a direction to decide the application afresh by treating the same as filed under the correct/desired section. Similar view has been taken by the Pune Tribunal in the case of Kimaya Ashram Charitable Trust (supra).
Respectfully following the decision(s) of the Co-ordinate Bench (supra) and considering the given facts and circumstances in the present case and also that the Ld. CIT(E) has not given any adverse findings on merits of the case, we deem it fit and proper, in the interest of justice, to grant an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(E) by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E). We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) who shall give an opportunity to the assessee to file the correct application/ treat the original application as filed under the correct section and then decide the case on merits denovo as per facts and law, after granting one final opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant in respect of the notice(s) of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(E) and submit the details/ documents as may be required/called upon by the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) is at liberty to pass appropriate order 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 allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th June, 2025.