BHABRIANI SAMADH BABA VERA JI WELFARE SOCIETY,AMRITSAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH
Facts
Two assessee trusts filed applications for registration under section 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, which were rejected by the CIT(E) on 05.08.2024. The rejection was primarily because the applications were filed under the wrong clause, rendering them not maintainable.
Held
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(E)'s rejection of the current applications due to the technical deficiency of filing under the wrong clause. However, it granted liberty to the assessees to file fresh applications under the correct clause, directing the CIT(E) to condone the delay and consider them de novo without prejudice to the merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in rejecting applications for 80G registration due to filing under an incorrect clause and the process for rectifying such technical deficiencies.
Sections Cited
Section 80G(5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per: DR. M.L. Meena, AM.:
Both the appeals have been preferred by the assessee feeling aggrieved by two
separate orders passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption),
Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to “the CIT(E)”] even dated 05.08.2024
challenging therein rejection of their application for registration under section 80G
(5) (ii) of the Income Tax Act (In short ‘the Act’).
None attended for the assessee. However, after hearing the Ld. CIT (DR) and
going through the written submission dated 05.08.2025 filed by the assessee, we find
that there was short delay of 35 days and 38 days in the ITA Nos. 603/Asr/2024 and
604/Asr/2024 respectively. The short delay in filing these appeals have been
condoned as the Ld. DR has no objection. Accordingly, these appeals were admitted
on merits.
From the perusal of record, we find that the Ld. CIT exemption has rejected
both the applications filed by the assessee in Form No. 10AB seeking approval u/s
80G (5) (ii) of the Income Tax Act summarily with similar observation as under:
“The application filed by the applicant is under wrong clause as
the same is not applicable in the case. Hence, the application is
cancelled being not maintainable.
ITA No. 603/Asr/2024 and 604/Asr/2024 3
It is observed that application filed by the applicant is applicable
in the cases where the institution or fund is approved under section
80G(5) for 5 years and the aforementioned application is required
to be filed when the period of such approval is due to expire, at
least 6 months prior to expiry of the said period as per the
provisions of Section 80G(5)(ii) of the act.”
From the record it is evident that the Ld. CIT (E) has categorically observed
that the application was filed by the applicant under wrong clause as the same is not
applicable in the case. Hence, the application is cancelled, not being maintainable.
Meaning thereby that the failure on the part of the appellant was technical deficiency
in filling Form 10 AB in wrong clause. The aforesaid deficiency pointed out by the
Ld. CIT (E) could be removed on filing Fresh application by the appellant in Form
10 AB in the correct clause applicable for the approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act.
Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT Exemption in
rejecting the approval u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act. Thus, the instant appeals of the
assessee trusts in ITA Nos. 603/Asr/2024 and 604/Asr/2024 are liable to be rejected.
Without prejudice to the above, we allow liberty to both the assessee Trusts
to file afresh application in correct clause in the prescribed Form for the approval
u/s 80G(5)(ii) of the Act, before the CIT (E) who shall condone the delay and
examine the application of the assessee Trust de novo as per the mandate. Thus, the
ITA No. 603/Asr/2024 and 604/Asr/2024 4
assessee Trusts are granted liberty that delay in filing the applications for approval
before the Ld. CIT (E) would be condoned in view of the technical deficiency in
their previous applications.
Without prejudice to the above, we make it clear that we have expressed no
opinion on the merits of the case and therefore, the Ld. CIT (E) shall be at liberty to
take a view without being influenced by any observation made hereinabove.
In the backdrop of the aforesaid discussion, both the instant appeals are
dismissed.
Order pronounced on 26.09.2025 in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (UDAYAN DASGUPTA) (DR. M. L. MEENA) Judicial Member Accountant Member
AKV
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order
