THE POORVA KHANDESH HINDI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,JALGAON vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 196/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 June 2025AY 2024-25Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's application for approval u/s.80G(5) should be restored to the file of the CIT(E) for necessary adjudication. The CIT(E) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and pass a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for approval u/s.80G(5) was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) because the assessee had not obtained regular registration u/s.12A(1)(ac). The assessee had initially filed the application under the wrong sub-clause of Section 12A(1)(ac).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the u/s.80G(5) approval application due to a pending u/s.12A(1)(ac) registration application filed under the incorrect sub-clause.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12A(1)(ac),Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii),Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah
For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan
Hearing: 04.06.2025Pronounced: 05.06.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 19.11.2024 framed by ld.CIT(Exemption), Pune denying grant of for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application filed for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act.

3.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that one of the reason for rejection of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act is that the assessee did not had regular registration u/s.12A(1)(ac) of the Act but actually it was filed under the wrong code u/s.12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and the same was rejected. He submitted that in view of extension of time limit for filing of Form No.10AB given by CBDT assessee has again filed 03.12.2024 and it is still pending in the office of ld.CIT(E). He therefore prayed that the instant issue of approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act may also be remitted to the file of ld.CIT(E) for necessary adjudication. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose this request.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. Considering the submission of the assessee and on perusal of the copy of application filed u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) on 03.12.2024 which is still pending before the concerned authority for grant of regular registration, we deem it proper that the assessee’s application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act also deserves to be restored to the file of ld.CIT(E) for necessary adjudication on merits of the case. Needless to say that ld.CIT(E) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order after considering the submissions of the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 05th day of June, 2025.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →