Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Roger Foundation, applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, via Form 10AB. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected the application on the technical ground that it was filed under the wrong sub-clause (12A(1)(ac)(iii)) instead of the correct one (12A(1)(ac)(i)). The assessee argued that this was an inadvertent mistake and that the application should be considered on merits, highlighting its status as an educational institution with prior registration under Section 12AA.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the rejection was based on a technicality without considering the merits of the application. Citing a similar case, the Tribunal held that such technical mistakes should not lead to rejection, especially when the assessee has provided all necessary details and sought correction. The Assessing Officer should have considered the application on merits after allowing for correction of the technical error.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of the application for registration under Section 12AB on a technical ground without considering the merits is justified. Whether the assessee should be allowed to rectify a minor technical error in filing the application.
Sections Cited
12AB(i)(ii)(B), 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12A(1)(ac)(i), 12AB(4), 12AA, 12A(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, DB: AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, DB: AGRA (Through Physical / Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.- 294/Agr/2025 [Assessment Year: 2024-25] Roger Foundation, VS Commissioner of Income Tax Khasra No. 157/158, 12 KM, (Exemption), Agra, Mathura Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Artauni, Agra. Sanjay Place, Agra, Uttar Pradesh- 282007. Uttar Pradesh-282002. PAN- AAFAR1898B Assessee Revenue Assessee by Shri Mardul Pathak, CA Revenue by Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 18.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 13.10.2025 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM:
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.03.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(E)’] pertaining to Assessment Year 2024-25, passed under Section ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on 12AB(i)(ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) rejecting the application filed in Form No.-10AB for the registration under Section 12AB of the Act.
Brief facts of the case are: The assessee had filed an application dated 28.09.2024 for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in Form no. 10AB. The Ld. PCIT(E) stated that these provisions were applicable in respect of trust/institution provisionally registered u/s 12AB of the Act, for three years and in such cases Form 10AB was to be filed at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional registration or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever was earlier. 2.1 Vide letter dated 03.01.2025, certain clarifications were sought from the assessee by the Ld. PCIT(E). After considering the reply of the assessee and material available on record and data available on ITBA it was noted by the Ld. PCIT(E) that assessee did not have provisional registration u/s 12A and accordingly held that since assessee does not have a valid provisional registration u/s 12A, hence application of assessee trust was found to be non- maintainable.
ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on 2.2. In view of the above facts, the application filed in Form No. 10AB for the registration u/s. 12AB of the I.T. Act, 1961, was rejected. 3. Against the above rejection, the assessee is in appeal before us on the following grounds of appeal: “
1. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in law AMD facts to reject the appellant's application for final registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act 1961, without considering the charitable objective of the society. 2 The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in law AMD facts to reject the registration application without considering that the society is an educational institution, which has been operating for several years AMD has held an old registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act from past years.
3. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in law AMD facts to reject the application merely on the technical ground that the application was filed in clause 12A(1)(ac)(iii) instead of 12A(1)(ac)(i) without pointing out any adverse remark regarding nature of activity, objectives AMD status of educational society.
4. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in law AMD facts to wrongly reject the application without complying the provisions contained in 12AB(4) i.e. specific violations for which registration u/s 12AB could be rejected.
5. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred in law AMD fact by issuing a rejection order without providing a sufficient opportunity to us to be heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
6. The order Issued by the Ld. CIT (Exemption), is erroneous AMD arbitrary, bad in law AMD against the facts of case.
7. That the appellant craves leave to Add to AMD/OR Amend, modify OR withdraw the grounds outlined above before OR at the time of hearing of the appeal."
ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on 4. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application merely on the technical ground that the application was filed in clause 12A(1)(ac)(iii) instead of 12A(1)(ac)(i) without pointing out any adverse remark regarding nature of activity, objectives and the status of educational society, being the assessee. 3.1 Further, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT (E) has erred in passing the rejection order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice 5. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT(DR) supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E).
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Firstly, we note that in ground no. 2 of the assessee submits that is an educational institution, which has been operating for several years and has held an old registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act from past years. 6.1 On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(E), it is seen that the same has been rejected on a technical ground that the application was filed under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) instead of Section 12A(1)(ac)(i) without pointing out any adverse remark regarding nature of activity, objectives and the status of educational society. 4 ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on 6.2 On similar facts, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal Surat in the case of Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust vs CIT (2024) 162 taxman.com 772 directed the Ld. CIT(E) to consider the application of the assessee afresh on merits and not to reject the same on technical grounds like filing the application in a wrong Form or applying under the wrong sub-clause of section 12A of the Act. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: - “We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the record carefully. There is no dispute that the assessee applied for registration under Section 12A/12AB of the Act under Form 10AB on 28.09.2023. The ld. CIT(E) while considering the application of assessee noted that the application filed by assessee is not maintainable and accordingly, a show cause notice dated 02/11/2023 was issued for seeking clarification. The assessee responded to the show cause notice of ld CIT(E) vide their reply dated 15.12.2023. The contents of show cause notice and the reply thereof is not recorded by ld CIT(E) in his order. We find that the assessee vide their reply dated 15/12/2023 prayed to consider the application in appropriate sub-clause of section 12A(1). The ld CIT(E) held that he has no power to change/ amend or rectify Form-10AB. We find that it was an inadvertent mistake and the assessee has already explained the facts and prayed for correction before the ld. CIT(E). In our view the mistake in filing entry was not fetal and could be considered in appropriate sub-clause or clause of section 12A(1). Otherwise, the assessee has provided all the details and information in Form-10AB, while applying for 5 ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on registration under section 12A/12AB. Being first appellate authority, the plea of assessee for correction in Form-10AB is accepted and the order of ld CIT(E) is set-aside. The registry official of ld CIT(E) maintaining record of ITBA portal about the registration of trust under section 12A/12AB is directed either to correct such mistake or allow the assessee to rectify or amend the relevant clause/ sub-clause of section 12A(1). Considering the fact that the application of assessee was not considered on merit, therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the ld. CIT(E) to treat the application of assessee under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in place of Section 12A(1)(ac)(iv) of the Act and to consider the case on merit and pass the order in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the ld CIT(E) shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish complete details to prove its object and activity and make all compliances as desired by the ld. CIT(E). In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only.
6. In the result, the appeal of assessee in is allowed for statistical purpose.
Similar view has also been expressed in the following orders of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal: - a) Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust vs CIT (ITAT, Delhi). b) Kimiya Ashram Charitable Trust vs CIT (ITAT, Pune).
ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on 8. In this case also, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee only on the technical ground as discussed in para no.6.1 of this order. Further, apparently no show-cause notice was issued by the Ld. CIT(A) before rejecting the application of the assessee.
8.1. We, therefore, considering the facts of the present case and relying upon the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust VS CIT (2024) 162 Taxman.com 772, direct the registry official of ld. CIT(E) maintaining record of ITBA portal about the registration of trust under section 12A/12AB either to correct such mistake or allow the assessee to rectify or amend the relevant clause/ sub-clause of section 12A(1) so as to make the application of the assessee technically correct to be considered for valid registration. Considering the fact that the application of assessee was not considered on merit, we, therefore, deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 26.03.2025 of the Ld. CIT(E) and direct him to treat the application of assessee under Section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act instead under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act and to consider the case on merit and pass an order afresh in accordance with law. Needless to state that ITA no.- 294/Agr/2025 Roger Founda�on before passing the order, the Ld. CIT(E) shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish complete details to prove its object and activity and make all compliances as desired by the Ld. CIT(E).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th October, 2025.