Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Vanaprastha Foundation, applied for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, which the CIT(E) rejected. The rejection was based on the technical ground that the application was filed under a wrong sub-clause, despite the trust's reported charitable activities.
Held
The ITAT deemed the CIT(E)'s approach to be hyper-technical and, following precedents, directed the CIT(E) to reconsider the application. The assessee was allowed to amend its Form 10AB and apply under the correct sub-sections of Section 12A(1)(ac), with the CIT(E) instructed to decide the application on merits. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and a 9-day delay in filing the appeal was condoned.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration under Section 12AB on technical grounds due to an application under a wrong sub-clause is justified, and if exemption provisions should be interpreted liberally.
Sections Cited
12A(1), 12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(vi), 12A(1)(ac), 11
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Vanaprastha Foundation, V The Commissioner of Ghar No.877, Deshmukh s. Income Tax(Exemption), Wada, Londhe Galli, Pune. Panchaleshwar Mandir, Nashik – 422103. Maharashtra. PAN: AADAV3029L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Sanket Joshi – AR Revenue by Shri Abhinay Kumbhar & Shri Vinod Pawar –DR Date of hearing 05/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commssioner of Income Tax(Exemption) passed under section 12A(1) r.w.s. 12AB of the Act, dated 30.09.2024. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
1. The learned CIT-(E), Pune has erred in rejecting application of the appellant trust filed u/s 12A(l)(ac)(vi) of the Act without appreciating that the said action is not justified on facts and in law.
The learned CIT-(E), Pune erred in rejecting the registration u/s 12AB on technical grounds without appreciating that the objects of the trust were charitable in nature and the appellant had indeed carried various charitable activities over the years and this fact was not doubted and hence, the rejection of registration u/s 12AB, merely on technical issue is not justified.
3. The learned CIT (E) failed to consider the fact that filing an application under wrong clause of proviso does not alter the objects or activities of trust and its procedural error/technical error and accordingly he ought to have granted registration.
4. The appellant craves leave to add/ alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal
.” Findings & Analysis :
2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Assessee had filed application in Form No.10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act, on 11.03.2024. Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application. The relevant paragraph is reproduced here as under : “As stated by the assessee, its activities were commenced in 05/04/2017. Thus, the assessee’s income pertaining to previous years 2021-22 to 2023-24, to the extent discussed above, has been excluded from the total income on account of applicability of section 11 which ocurres after the commencement of such activities.
Considering the above, and since activities were already commenced at the time of filing the present application, the assessee trust is not eligible to file application u/s 12AC(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM ‘B’ of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the application filed by the assessee is hereby rejected.”
2.1 Thus, ld.CIT(E) rejected the application only on the one ground that assessee had applied for registration under wrong sub- clause. Admittedly, assessee had applied under wrong sub-clause, however, ld.CIT(E) has taken a very hyper technical approach. The Exemption Provisions are to be interpreted liberally.
The ITAT Cochin in the case of Sahradya Educational Trust Vs. CIT(E) in held as under : We are satisfied that the earlier orders relied on by the assessee equally applies to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand. We are therefore following the above orders of the Kolkata as well as the Surat Tribunal orders and set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) with a direction to the Ld.CIT(E) to consider the application filed by the assessee in the correct provision or allow the assessee to amend the said form 10AB filed on23/11/2023 and decide the same on merits and also in accordance with the principles laid down in the above said orders of the Kolkata and Surat Tribunals.
3.1 Respectfully following the decision of ITAT Cochin and ITAT Surat, we direct ld.CIT(E) to consider the application filed by the assessee under the correct sub-sections of Section 12A(1)(ac) provisions and decide the application on merits. Assessee shall be allowed to file the details. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
There was a delay of 09 days in filing appeal before ITAT. We found that there was sufficient cause, hence, delay is condoned. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07 May, 2025.