SOCIETY OF MAGIS,CHENNAI vs. CIT,EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee should not suffer due to an inadvertent mistake in filling the form. The order of the CIT(E) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee society applied for registration under Section 10(23C)(iv)(B) of the Income-tax Act. The application was rejected by the CIT(E) because the word 'religious' was inadvertently mentioned as an object in Form No. 10AB.
What were the issues?
Whether an inadvertent mention of 'religious' as an object in Form 10AB should lead to rejection of registration under Section 10(23C) for a charitable trust.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai [hereinafter “CIT(E)”] dated 19.08.2024 rejecting approval for registration u/s. 10(23C)(iv)(B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”).
ITA No.2619/Chny/2024 :- 2 -:
The effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against the rejection of application filed in Form No.10AB seeking approval u/s. 10(23C) of the Act on the ground mentioning religious in column No.5 of Form 10AB.
The assessee-society has filed online application on 12.12.2024 in Form No.10AB seeking approval for registration u/s. 10(23C) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application as the assessee in Form No.10AB at column No.5 has mentioned one of the objects as “religious”. The assessee before the Ld. CIT(E) has submitted that the assessee-society has been established with the primary objective of supporting education, healthcare, poverty alleviation and is not engaged in any religious activity as apparent from the objects of the trust. The Ld. CIT(E) however has rejected the application as religious was mentioned in coloumn No.5 and form was duly signed.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that while filing Form No.10AB in column No.5 objects of the trust, it has been inadvertently mentioned religious along with other activities of the trust. The ld. AR has submitted copy of memorandum of association in support of his contention that assessee’s objects
ITA No.2619/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: nowhere mentions religious. The Ld AR submitted that wrong filing in Form No.10AB was inadvertent and therefore, one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee to prove his case before Ld. CIT(E).
The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E).
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application filled Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s. 10(23C) of the Act, for the reason that the assessee in column 5 of Form No. 10AB has mentioned the objects as religious. The Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee is not a religious trust and the trust deed clearly stipulates that the assessee is a charitable trust to promote various charitable activities irrespective of caste, creed and gender or religion. The Ld AR submitted that assessee has inadvertently filed “religious” in column No.5 of Form No.10AB in place of charitable which is evident from the trust deed. We are of opinion that the assessee should not suffer from the inadvertent mistake in filling the form. We, therefore set aside the order of Ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to decide the application afresh after providing proper
ITA No.2619/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: opportunity to the assessee. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13th December, 2024.
More judgments on Section 10(23C)
- Sheo Narayan Trust, Khajpura vs CIT Exemption, PatnaITA 554/PAT/2026[2025-2026]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2025-2026
- Gurukul Shiksha Sanstha, Chandrapur vs ITO Ward - 3, Exemp, NagpurITA 549/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Neuro Spinal Services and Research Society… vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption…ITA 1601/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2025-26
- Samudayik Kendra Subhash Nagar Prabhand… vs Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption, JaipurITA 1440/JPR/2026[2027-28]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2027-28
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026