Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application as it was filed beyond the due date and not covered by the relevant CBDT circulars, despite an earlier provisional registration. The assessee argued for an opportunity to present documentary evidence.
Held
The Tribunal held that the application was filed beyond the prescribed time limit and was not maintainable. The Tribunal noted that the previous application was also rejected, and the provisional registration was cancelled.
Key Issues
Whether the application for registration under Section 12AB was maintainable when filed beyond the statutory time limit and not covered by any extension circular. Whether the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without providing an opportunity to the assessee to submit documentary evidence.
Sections Cited
12AB, 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 356/Ahd/2025 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : NA) बनाम/ Aareev Foundation CIT(Exemption) B-202, Unaddeep, Susen 609, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Tarsali Road, Vadodara, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad Gujarat - 390009 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAITA5961G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Parth Pathak, A.R. ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R P Rastogi, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 03/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 11/07/2025 (आदेश)/ORDER PER SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(E)”), Ahmedabad dated 16.12.2024, rejecting assessee’s application seeking registration of the assessee trust under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:
[Aareev Foundation vs. CIT(E)] - 2 – “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) ["Ld. CIT(E)") erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for final registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the alleged ground that the genuineness of the activities of the Trust/Institution was not established due to non-filing of documentary evidence.
That the Ld. CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the Trust/Institution has been carrying out genuine charitable activities in accordance with its objectives and has been regularly engaged in activities for the benefit of the public at large.
3. That the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have considered the past financial statements, activity reports, and other relevant documents submitted by the Trust, which clearly demonstrated the genuineness of the Trust's activities.
4. That the rejection of the application solely on the ground of non- filing of documentary evidence is arbitrary and contrary to the established legal principles that require a holistic consideration of the Trust's objectives and activities.
5. That the Ld. CIT(E) failed to consider that the Trust has already been granted provisional registration under Section 12AB, which itself indicates that the initial scrutiny had found the Trust's objects to be charitable and genuine.
6. That the Trust undertakes to furnish any additional documentary evidence, including activity reports, bank statements, and other relevant records, to substantiate the genuineness of its activities if provided with an opportunity.
7. That in view of the foregoing, the rejection of the final registration under Section 12AB is unjustified and liable to be set aside.
8. That the Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without granting the Trust an opportunity to furnish the required documentary evidence in support of its activities, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.”
The solitary argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us was that the impugned application filed by the assessee seeking final registration of the assessee trust in terms of the provisions of Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act has been rejected without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, [Aareev Foundation vs. CIT(E)] - 3 – therefore, the matter may be restored back to the Ld. CIT(E) for re-consideration.
We have, however, gone through the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and we have noted that the impugned application is the second application filed by the assessee seeking final approval of trust u/s.12AB of the Act. The original application filed by the assessee dated 17.09.2023 already stood rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) vide order dated 23.02.2024 and the provisional registration granted to the assessee was also cancelled. Noting the above facts, the Ld. CIT(E) further noted that the present application filed by the assessee was beyond the due date specified in law for filing application seeking registration .He noted that though the CBDT had extended the time for filing such applications vide circular No. 7/2024 and the assesses application was filed within the extended time, but the assessee would not be benefited from the same since its application was not covered by para 4.1 of CBDT Circular, which specified applications which were maintainable within the extended time provided by the said circular. Accordingly, he rejected the present application filed by the assessee as non-maintainable being filed beyond the time limit prescribed in law. His findings in this regard are as under:
“The present application for approval of the trust under sub- clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act in Form 10AB of the I.T. Act, 1961 was filed as per above details Notices were issued to the applicant as enumerated in row no 10 of table given at first page of order. The assessee is granted provisional approval in Form 10AC under sub-clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A on 03.04.2023 from A.Y 2023-24.
[Aareev Foundation vs. CIT(E)] - 4 – 2. To begin with, on perusal of the details available on record it is observed that earlier application(s) of the applicant had already been rejected (with following details) and also above referred provisional registration has been cancelled. Sr. Application 17.09.2023 Order/DIN number Date of no. filed u/s of the order Act 1. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) 17.09.2023 ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023- 23.02.2024 24/1061420119(1)
However, the above referred rejection order is not been covered by the para 4.1 of CBOT'S circular number 07 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024 and accordingly the present application filed by the assessee within the extended date i.e. 30.06.2024 stands non-maintainable. 3 Hence, in view of the above, the present application filed in Form No. 10AB under sub-clause (i) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act is rejected as to be non-maintainable without going into the merits.”
The Ld.Counsel for the assessee was unable to controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT (E) as above that the impugned application filed by the assessee seeking final registration u/s 12AB of the Act was filed beyond the date specified in law for filing the same and also that it was not saved by the CBDT Circular extending the time limit for filing such applications.
Considering the above facts we see no reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(E) rejecting assesses application seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Act.
The remedy with the assessee, as per law, against the denial of registration u/s 12AB of the Act, lay with filing of appeal against the original order denying grant of approval to the assessee, which was passed by the Ld. CIT(E) vide order dated [Aareev Foundation vs. CIT(E)] - 5 – 23.02.2024. The assessee is at liberty to pursue the said course of action. We are conscious of the fact that the appeal so filed would be time barred, but the assesses bonafide belief of remedying the rejection by filing a fresh application to the Ld.CIT(E) which has been held non maintainable by him on account of being delayed, which in turn has been confirmed by us, may be considered by the ITAT while condoning the delay in the filing of the appeal.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
This Order pronounced on 11/07/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 11/07/2025 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. �वभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,