Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal challenging the order rejecting its application for permanent registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had previously obtained provisional registration and later filed for permanent registration, but made errors in filling the form.
Held
The Tribunal held that an unintentional error in filling the application form should not be held against the assessee, especially when a rectifying application was filed. The CIT's order was set aside, and the matter was restored for reconsideration.
Key Issues
Rejection of application for permanent registration under section 80G due to clerical error in form filling.
Sections Cited
80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI
Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN
O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 02-09-2024 passed by the Ld.CIT(Exemptions)-Mumbai [„Ld.CIT(E)‟], rejecting the application filed by the assessee, seeking permanent registration u/s. 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟).
The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was earlier granted provisional registration u/s. 80G of the Act. Later it filed application in the prescribed form seeking permanent registration. However, while filling up the form, the assessee chose wrong clauses, which resulted in rejection of the application. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had also filed another application choosing correct clauses, i.e., rectifying the mistake made in the original application, but the said application was not taken into consideration by the Ld.CIT(E) while processing the original application. Accordingly, the Ld.AR prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) with a direction to process the application of the assessee by considering the amended application.
We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. Having regard to thesubmissions made by the Ld.AR, we are of the view that there is merit in the submissions made by the assessee. In our view, unintentional error committed in filling up the form should not be viewed against the assessee, when the assessee has corrected the mistake by filing another application. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(E) and restore all the issues to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for examining the application of the assessee by duly considering the amended application filed by the assessee. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the Ld.CIT(E) may take appropriate decision in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.