Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Om Education Trust, which had provisional registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi), applied for regular registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and approval under Section 80G(5). The CIT(E) rejected both applications, citing the delay in filing the regular registration application beyond the prescribed six-month period and the absence of a valid 12A/12AB registration. The assessee contended it was a new trust unfamiliar with legal requirements and had, in fact, filed the application six months before its provisional registration expired.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CBDT had extended the deadline for filing Form 10AB and that the CIT(E) now has the power to condone delays. Consequently, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside both appeals, remanding the matter back to the CIT(E) with a directive to condone the delay, re-examine the regular registration application on its merits, and then re-adjudicate the 80G(5) approval.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the assessee's applications for regular registration and 80G approval due to delayed filing, and if the delay should be condoned given the circumstances.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(ii), 80G(5), 12A(1)(ac)(vi), 12AB, 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, [in short “CIT(E)”], both dated 24.09.2025 in the proceeding u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) and u/s. 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application in Form No. 10AB for renewal of registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had noted that the assessee was having only provisional registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act. The assessee was not having any regular registration issued u/s. 12AB of the Act. Further & 2236/Ahd/2025 Om Education Trust Vs. CIT(E) 2 the application for regular registration was required to be filed within a period of six months from the commencement of business activities or at least six months prior to expiry of the provisional registration, whichever was earlier, and this timeline was not complied in the present case. The Ld. CIT(E) had, therefore, rejected the application of the assessee. Further in the absence of any valid registration u/s. 12A of the Act, the application for approval u/s. 80G of the Act, was also rejected.
Aggrieved with the orders of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken by the assessee in ITA No. 2235/Ahd/2025.
1 The order passed by the CIT(Exemption) is bad in law and required to be quashed.
2. Ld. CIT(E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting registration application filed in Form 10AB of the Act by observing that appellant trust failed to apply for final registration pursuant to provisional registration gratned by them.
3. Ld. CIT(E) ought to have consider the fact being a first time implementation of complicated registration required liberal view.
4. Appellant trust prays to set aside filed to CIT(E) with a request to condone delay in applying final registration by observing principle of natural justice.
Shri Parin Shah, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a new trust and had obtained provisional registration on 31.12.2021 which was valid for A.Ys. 2022-23 to 2024-25. The assessee being a new trust was not conversant with the requirements and, therefore, the application for regular registration was not filed within a period of six months from the commencement of business. The Ld. AR & 2236/Ahd/2025 Om Education Trust Vs. CIT(E) 3 explained that the assessee had, however, filed the present application u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, six months prior to the expiry of the provisional registration. He explained that the Ld. CIT(E) was not correct in not condoning the delay in filing the application and rejecting the application on the ground of delay. He, therefore, requested that the matter may be set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to condone the delay and thereafter consider the applications of the assessee on merits.
Per contra, Shri R P Rastogi, the Ld. CIT-DR, supported the orders of Ld. CIT(E). He, however, had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E).
We have considered the request of the assessee. As the facts stands the assessee was allowed provisional registration on 31.12.2021 which was valid for A.Ys. 2022-23 and A.Y. 2024-25. The assessee was required to apply for regular registration within a period of six months from the commencement of business. The trustee of the assessee trust has filed an affidavit explaining that the trust being new, the trustees were not conversant with the requirements of law and, therefore, could not submit the application for regular registration within six months from the commencement of business. The present application was, however, filed six months prior to the expiry of provisional registration. The CBDT had extended the deadline for filing Form No. 10AB up to 30.06.2024. Further the provision of the Act has also been amended and the CIT(E) has now power to condone the delay. In the interest of justice, therefore, we deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to & 2236/Ahd/2025 Om Education Trust Vs. CIT(E) 4 condone the delay in filing of application by the assessee and thereafter re-examine the matter for grant of regular registration u/s 12A of the Act to the assessee, on merits. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) and produce the documents and clarifications as required by him.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
The application for approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) for the reason that the assessee was not having a valid registration u/s. 12A/12AB of the Act. Since the matter regarding registration u/s. 12A of the Act has been set aside to the Ld. CIT(E), the present appeal in respect of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act is also set aside to the file of Ld.CIT(E), who should re-adjudicate the issue of grant of approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act, after deciding the issue of registration u/s. 12A/12AB of the Act.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the Court on 03/03/2026 at Ahmedabad.