ST. THOMAS SYRO MALABAR CATHOLIC CHURCH,KOLKATA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1568/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 January 2026AY 2025-20266 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the present appeal was covered by its own coordinate bench's decision in the assessee's own case (ITA No.1567/Kol/2025). In that earlier decision, the Tribunal had dealt with an inadvertent filing of Form 10AB for AY 2023-24 instead of AY 2024-25. The Tribunal had admitted an additional ground allowing the assessee to withdraw the inadvertently filed Form 10AB and quash the consequent order. The Tribunal had reasoned that the assessee was already registered under Section 12AA before the amendment and was eligible for registration under Section 12AB(1)(ac)(vi) for a period of five years from AY 2021-22 to 2025-26, as against the three years granted. Therefore, the CIT(E) was directed to allow registration from AY 2021-22 to 2025-26. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the first issue raised in the additional grounds. Regarding the second issue of inadvertent filing, the Tribunal quashed the Form 10AB filed for AY 2023-24 and the consequent order in Form 10AD, citing a coordinate bench decision in Sawansukha Foundation. Following this precedent, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of the CIT(E).

What were the facts?

The assessee, St. Thomas Syro Malabar Catholic Church, is a charitable institution. It held registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, from AY 2020-21. Subsequently, it obtained provisional registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) in Form 10AC from AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24. For AY 2025-26, the assessee filed an application in Form 10AB on 29.11.2024. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)], Kolkata, issued notices, which were replied to by the assessee. However, the CIT(E) found the undertaking furnished by the assessee to be incorrect and rejected the application in Form 10AB by an order dated 27.06.2025. The assessee appealed this order to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT noted that the appeal was squarely covered by its own earlier decision in the assessee's own case for a different assessment year.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the Act, despite the assessee providing all required clarifications and documentary evidence, and being a bonafide applicant entitled to registration. - Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that it had provided all necessary information and was a genuine applicant. It also contended that it had been filing ITR-7 claiming exemption under Section 11 in previous AYs (2021-22 to 2023-24) while holding provisional registration, and that the rejection was unjust and against natural justice. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in alleging the provision of incorrect information contradictory to facts, given the assessee's prior provisional registration and continued claim of exemption under Section 11. - Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that its claim for exemption under Section 11 was valid based on its provisional registration until AY 2023-24, and that the rejection was not in line with settled law. The assessee also raised an additional ground in a related appeal, stating that Form 10AB was inadvertently filed for AY 2023-24 instead of AY 2024-25, and requested it be treated as withdrawn. 3. Whether the refusal to grant registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) was unjust and beyond natural justice, as no objections were raised regarding the genuineness of objects or activities. - Assessee's contention: The assessee maintained that the rejection was unjust, as no issues were raised about its charitable objects or activities, and the denial of registration was unfair to a genuine trust.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 12AA,Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi),Section 12AB(1)(ac)(vi),Section 11,Section 2(15)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsian, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Hearing: 01.12.2025Pronounced: 13.01.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 23.12.2025 for the AY 2023-24.

2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

“1. That, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) has erred on facts and in law in having rejected the appliction in Form No.10AB e-filed on 29/11/2024 for 1. registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the Act in spite of the fact that all the queries/ clarifications raised in the notices were replied with supporting documentary evidences and other requirements as per law and moreover the appellant-trust being a bonafide applicant is entitled to get the final registration as applied for.

2.

That, the L.d. CIT(Exemption) while rejecting the application in Form-10AB for approval of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) (vi) (B) of the Act for A.Y. 2025-26 erred in having alleged for providing incorrect information contradictory to the facts of the case because the assessee has been filing ITR-7 claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act in the

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the appeal of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of this co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case in vide order dated 23.12.2025, the operative part of the same is read as under:-

“3. At the time of hearing, the counsel of the assessee raised additional ground which is extracted as under:- “That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee trust inadvertently filled From 10AB for A.Y. 2023-24 on 05.03.2023 instead of A.Y. 2024-25 for registration u/s 12A of the Act although the assessee trust was duly accorded provisional registration till A.Y. 2023-24 vide order dated 27.05.2021 and thus was no required to file Form 10AB for A.Y. 2023-24, accordingly the said Form 10AB filed by the assessee may kindly be treated as withdrawn and consequent order in Form 10AD passed by the learned CIT (E), Kolkata may kindly quashed.” 3.1. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal and requested that Form 10AB filed by the assessee may kindly be treated as withdrawn and consequent order in Form 10AD passed by the learned CIT (E) may be quashed. In our opinion the issued raised in the additional ground is a purely a legal issue qua which all the facts are available in the appeal folder and no further verification of facts are required from any quarter whatsoever. In our considered view the assessee is at liberty to raise any legal issue before any appellate authority for the first time even when the same has not been raised before the lower authorities. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decisions of the Apex court in the case of i) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688 , ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 and also by the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in PCIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal). Therefore, we are inclined to admit the same for adjudication.

4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessee was registered u/s 12AA of the Act from A.Y. 2020-21 on 03.10.2019. The assessee filed an application in form no.10A for provisional registration

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13.01.2026.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →