ARISE FOUNDATION ,CHENNAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the extended time limit for filing applications, as per CBDT circulars and a Madras High Court decision, would apply. Therefore, the rejection based on the timeline was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust applied for approval under Section 80G after the stipulated time limit, based on its commencement of activities. The CIT(E) rejected the application as time-barred.
What were the issues?
Whether the application for approval under Section 80G was time-barred despite subsequent CBDT circulars and judicial pronouncements extending the deadline.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by rejection of application filed in Form No.10AB on 14.06.2023 for seeking approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of Sec.80G vide impugned order dated 28.12.2023, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
From the record, it emerges that the assessee trust filed an application in Form No.10AB on 14.06.2023 seeking registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Sec.80G. It transpired that the assessee trust was incorporated on 14.06.2023 and it commenced its activities on 15.07.2015. The assessee was granted provisional approval in Form No.10AC u/s 80G(5)(iv) for the period commencing from 06.10.2021 to AY 2024-25. The first proviso to Sec. 80G (5), provide timeline for an application to be filed under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Sec.80G. As per sub-clause (iii) of this proviso, the assessee was required to file this application at least before 6 months prior to expiry of provisional approval or within 6 months from the date of commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier. The said timeline was mandatory in nature. As against this, the assessee filed application on 14.06.2023 which was much after expiry of 6 months from commencement of its activities. Accordingly, it was held by Ld. CIT(E) that the application was time barred and liable to be rejected.
The Ld. CIT(E) also noted that under the new regime, CBDT, on multiple occasions, extended time limit for filing the application in Form No.10A and / or 10AB. The latest Circular No.08 of 2022 dated 31.03.2022 extended the time limit to 30.09.2022 beyond which there was no further extension. This was evident from subsequent CBDT Circular No.22/2022 dated 01.11.2022 through which CBDT extended time limit for filing application in Form No.10A under various Sections, up-to 25.11.2022. However no further extension was granted for filing of Form No.10AB. Also, CBDT issued another Circular No.6/2023 on 24.05.2023 extending due date for filing application in Form No.10AB from 30.09.2022 to 30.09.2023 only in respect of trusts / institutions registered u/s 10(23C) and 12AB. The said Circular did not mention any such extension of due date for filing Form No.10AB to get approval u/s 80G. Therefore, the application was treated as time barred and rejected as non-maintainable. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
It is admitted fact that the assessee is has commenced its activities on 15.07.2015. It could further be noted that the assessee has already received provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) for a period commencing from 06.10.2021 to AY 2024-25. It sought approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) by filing Form No.10AB on 14.06.2023 which has been rejected by Ld. CIT(E) on the ground that the assessee had violated the mandatory time lines as statutorily provided. However, we find that this issue has been decided by co-ordinate bench in bunch of appeals titled as M/s CIT-1982 Charitable Trust & Ors, order dated 08.03.2024 wherein the bench held that the extended time limit of 30.09.2023 as per CBDT Circular would apply to Form No.10AB as well.
The bench also takes note of the latest decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust in WP Nos.27030 & ors. of 2024 order dated 02.04.2024 wherein Hon’ble Court has held that clause 5(ii) of Circular No.6 of 2023 dated 24.05.2023 is illegitimate, arbitrary and ultra vires the constitution of India. 6. We also take note of the recent Circular No.07/24 issued by CBDT on 25.04.2024 extending time limit for all such applications to 30.06.2024. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. CIT(E) to consider the application on merits without raising the issue of timeline.
More judgments on Section 80G
- Savan Dayalal Ladani, Rajkot vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1)…ITA 575/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Pareshbhai Savjibhai Khunt, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward - 2(2)(3), RajkotITA 842/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 777/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs CIT(Exemption), HyderabadITA 776/HYD/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026