Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, a charitable trust, applied for regular registration under Section 12A after having provisional registration. An error occurred in Form 10B where a wrong sub-clause of Section 12A(ac) was inadvertently selected. Despite the appellant seeking to rectify this technical error, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected the application.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Commissioner's approach was hyper-technical. It set aside the impugned order and directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) to dispose of the application afresh, considering the correct application form submitted by the assessee in response to the show cause notice.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of an application for Section 12A registration based on a technical error in selecting a sub-clause, which the applicant sought to rectify, is legally sustainable.
Sections Cited
12(1)(ac), 12A, 12A(1)(ac)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM
Viswaprakash Educational and Charitable Trust O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kochi dated 24.09.2024 & 25.09.2024
Since identical issues are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing for are stated herein.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a charitable trust found with the object of imparting education. The appellant had applied for provisional approval/registration u/s. 12(1)(ac) of the Act on 31.03.2021 and provisional registration was granted on 27.05.2021. The appellant trust applied for regular registration u/s. 12A of the Act on 28.03.2024 in Form 10B. However, while submitting the application in Form 10B wrong sub-clause of clause (ac) of section 12A was selected, i.e. instead of sub-clause (iii) sub- clause (ii) was selected. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), on noticing the above discrepancy had called upon the appellant trust to explain as to why the application should not be rejected. In response to the show cause notice the appellant applied for rectification of the mistake in the selection of sub-clause of clause (ac) of Section 12A of the Act. However, the Commissioner
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. On mere reading of the impugned order it would be very clear that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) denied grant of registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac) merely on the ground that the appellant had chosen a wrong sub-clause of clause (ac) of section 12A of the Act. The approach adopted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is too hyper technical. When the appellant trust submitted a rectification application in response to the show cause notice given by him, he ought to have taken on record the correct application and processed the application in accordance with law. Therefore, in order to meet the ends of justice, the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is hereby set aside and direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) to dispose of the application afresh taking into consideration the correct application form submitted by the assessee in response to the show cause notice.
Since identical issued are involved in the other two appeals, the above findings are mutatis mutandis apply to these appeals also.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd May, 2025.