Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Sankalp Voluntary Social Organisation, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(E) who rejected their application for registration under section 80G. The rejection was based on a technical ground regarding the sub-clause used for provisional registration, rather than the merits of the application.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) summarily rejected the application without considering its merits. It referred to Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, which states that minor defects do not invalidate actions if they conform to the Act's substance. The Tribunal opined that an inadvertent technical error should not be fatal to the registration.
Key Issues
Whether a technical error in an application for registration under section 80G can lead to outright rejection without considering the merits of the trust's activities.
Sections Cited
80G, 292B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
Date of Hearing – 03/03/2025 Date of Order – 21/03/2025
O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.
Instant appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 17/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, [“learned CIT(E)”].
The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and circumstances of the law, the CIT (Exemption), Pune is refusing the exemption and registration of the trust u/s 80G.
2. The Hon'ble CIT (exemption) rejected the application for final registration u/s 80G only on the technical grounds that the application for provisional registration made by assessee under different sub-cause of the proviso to sec 80G without verification charitable activities and genuiness of the activities of trust.
Any other ground of appeal to be raised at the time of hearing with prior approval of the Hon'ble Authority.
2 Sankalp Voluntary Social Organisation ITA no.553/Nag./2024
3. The learned CIT(A) rejected the registration only on the ground that the assesse applied for provisional registration under Sub-clause (A) of clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of Income tax which should be Sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G to the interpretation of rejection order passed by the learned CIT.
Before us, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee pleaded that the technical error in uploading is inadvertent and the matter may be reconsidered by the learned CIT(E).
The learned Departmental Representative submitted that there is no enabling provision to ignore the mistake.
We are constrained to note that multiple cases are being fixed for adjudication before this appeal also exactly on similar and identical issue on almost each day. The stand of the learned CIT(E) in summarily rejecting the application without delving into the merits is unjustified. We note that provisions of section 292B prescribes that any mistake or defect in any notice, summon is not sufficient to invalidate on action provided that the same is substance and effect is in conformity with the provisions of the Act. Here also, an inadvertent technical error may not be fatal to deny registration. In line with the consistent stand taken by us, this appeal is set aside to the file of the learned CIT(E) who is directed to reconsider the matter.
3 Sankalp Voluntary Social Organisation ITA no.553/Nag./2024
In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/03/2025