UPAKAR INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENT CIR-2(4), HYDERABAD

Briefly stated facts of the case are that, the assessee-trust viz., Jiddu Krishnamurti Centre was in existence since 13.10.1995 and is registered u/sec.12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] prior to 01.04.2021. The appellant-trust got provisional registration issued by the CPC, Bengaluru on 05.04.2022 u/sec.12A and 80G of the Act. The appellant-trust has e-filed application on 26.09.2024 in Form 10AB seeking for registration u/sec.12AB and 80G of the Act. The learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB on the ground that the appellant-trust being an existing trust registered u/sec.12A on or before 31.03.2021, should have filed Form 10A by opting the section code 12A(1)(ac)(i) for renewal of registration under new regime instead assessee has filed Form 10AB which is applicable for new trust who got provisional registration from the Department. Similarly, the learned CIT(E) rejected the 3 ITA.Nos.380 & 381/Hyd./2025 application filed in Form 10AB seeking registration u/sec.80G of the Act on the ground that, assessee being an existing trust registered u/sec.80G of the Act on or before 31.03.2021 should have file Form 10A by opting section code 80G(5)(i) instead of 80G(5)(iv) of the Act.

Aggrieved by the orders of the learned CIT(A), the appellant-trust now, preferred the present appeals before the Tribunal.

None appeared for the appellant-trust. We have heard the Learned CIT-DR Shri B. Bala Krishna and considered the relevant orders passed by the learned CIT(E), rejecting the applications filed by the assessee in Form 10AB seeking for registration u/sec.12AB and 80G of the Act.

Admittedly, the appellant-trust was in existence before 01.04.2021 and got provisional registration on 05.04.2022 u/sec.12AB and 80G of the Act. The appellant- trust has filed e-application in Form 10AB seeking for permanent registration u/sec.12AB and 80G of the Act. The 4 ITA.Nos.380 & 381/Hyd./2025 learned CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the appellant-trust on technical grounds of filing incorrect application in Form 10AB and selecting in-applicable section code instead of filing Form 10A with appropriate section code. Otherwise, the learned CIT(E) never disputed the fact that appellant-trust was in existence before 01.04.2021 and got provisional registration from the CPC. The learned CIT(E) has also not disputed the fact that appellant-trust has filed application in Form 10AB before the due date provided for filing such application as notified by the CBDT which is up-to 30.06.2024. No doubt, the appellant-trust should have filed Form 10A and opted for section code 12A(1)(ac)(i) instead of sec.12A(1)(ac)(iv) for registration u/sec.12AB of the Act. Similarly, appellant- trust should have filed Form 10A for registration by opting section code 80G(5)(i) instead of sec.80G(5)(iv) of the Act. The appellant-trust has explained the reasons for filing incorrect Form with inappropriate codes and according to the appellant-trust, it is a technical error and because of ambiguity in law, otherwise, there is no intention to file an 5 ITA.Nos.380 & 381/Hyd./2025 incorrect Form for obtaining undue benefit. In our considered view, when the appellant-trust has explained the reasons for filing incorrect Form with inappropriate code, the learned CIT(E) ought to have consider the application filed by the appellant-trust or should have directed the appellant-trust to file a correct application Form with appropriate code, more particularly, when the appellant- trust has filed it’s application on or before the due date provided under the Act for filing such applications. Further, for filing incorrect Form, the appellant-trust cannot be left without any remedy and cannot be subjected to hardship forever by permanently depriving of Registration u/sec.12AB and Registration u/sec.80G of the Act on account of an inadvertent error that occurred in earlier application, which resulted in granting of provisional registration by the CPC instead of regular approval. Therefore, we are of the considered view, that the learned CIT(E) instead of directing the appellant-trust for filing correct application, has rejected the application filed by the appellant-trust on technical grounds, even though, the 6 ITA.Nos.380 & 381/Hyd./2025 appellant-trust has explained the reasons for filing such application. Thus, we set-aside the order of the learned CIT(E) passed in Form 10AD and rejected the application filed by the appellant-trust seeking registration u/sec.12AB and sec.80G of the Act and restore the issue back to the file of learned CIT(E) to consider the application filed by the appellant-trust on merits, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant-trust. We further direct the learned CIT(E) to allow the appellant-trust to file correct application in Form 10A with appropriate code and consider the said application, as if it was filed on the date i.e., 29.06.2024 when the first application was filed by the appellant-trust in incorrect Form with inappropriate code and decide the issue on merits for registration of the trust u/sec.12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.