S S FOUNDATION,KUMARPARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

S.S. Foundation 2 CIT(Exemption) has erred in rejecting the condonation of delay in filing form 10AB stating that the delay in filing of the application cannot be condoned by it. 3 The learned CIT(Exemption) is not justified in cancelling the provisional certificate issued to the assesee with effect from the date of its issue, 4 CBDT has extended date of filing of various forms including form u/s 12A for registration of trust vide circular no. 6 dated 24.05.2023 upto 30.09.2023 without extending the date of registration under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G which was upto 30.09.2022 is not justified and arbitrary. 5 That the appellant craves leave of you to take additional grounds of appeal and/or modify or resign any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”

It is admitted fact that the assessee has already commenced its activities on 24.11.2021. It could further be noted that the assessee has already received provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) for a period commencing from 24.11.2021 to AY 2024-25. It sought approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) by filing Form No.10AB on 18.08.2023 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 as under: - “7.8 After hearing the arguments of ld. counsel for the assessee and ld. CIT-DR as noted above, we find from the facts that the timeline prescribed for filing Form No.10AB for registration u/s.12A of the Act in the case of assessee trust has been extended up-to 30.09.2023 after considering the genuine hardship faced by charitable institutions vide various CBDT circulars and finally, vide Circular - 29 - ITA Nos.827, 875 & 1136/Chny/2023 No.6/2023 dated 24.05.2023. Similarly, the timeline prescribed for filing Form No.10A for recognition u/s.80G of the Act was also extended up-to 30.09.2023 by the same circular for trusts filing registration under clause (i) to first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. But the above extension was not extended beyond 30.09.2022, unlike other forms which 3 S.S. Foundation were extended up to 30.09.2023 to the disputed forms namely Form No.10AB for renewal of recognition u/s.80G(5) of the Act under clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. Once, the CBDT has extended the timeline for filing Form No.10AB for recognition u/s.12A of the Act and also for filing Form No.10A for recognition u/s.80G of the Act extended up to 30.09.2023 for trusts filing registration under clause (i) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, we find no difference in continuing hardship as recognized by CBDT even in filing Form No.10AB for renewal of recognition u/s.80G of the Act under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. In our view, this being a genuine hardship case, which is recognized by Revenue or CBDT by issuing a general circular, we are of the view that this specific provision of clause (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) cannot be excluded and or it has not been the intention of the CBDT while issuing the circular. There cannot be a distinction within the same provision without bringing out any exception and even this provision is for the benefit of the donors who are donating money to the charitable trusts for claiming exemption in their returns of income. In our view, we agree with the argument of ld. counsel for the assessee that the timeline prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act should be treated as directory and not mandatory especially considering the transitional nature of the amendment as brought out by the taxation of other laws (relaxation and amendment of certain provisions) act 2020 for bringing new regime. Hence, in our view, the CIT(Exemptions) should not have rejected the assessee’s application in Form No.10AB only for this technical reason. We are of the view that the intention of CBDT in its circular clearly reflects their mind that once the timeline prescribed for filing Form No.10AB for recognition u/s.12A of the Act has been extended up to 30.09.2023, the same may be treated as extended for forms namely Form No.10AB for renewal of approval/recognition/registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G of the Act also. Hence, we accept the plea of assessee and agree with the arguments of ld. counsel for the assessee and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(Exemption) to decide the issue on merits. Hence, the order of CIT(Exemption) on this issue is set aside and matter is remanded back to the file of the CIT(Exemption) for redeciding the issue on merits as per law. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The bench thus 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. It has been held as under: -

In the result, these Writ Petitions are allowed on the following terms: - (i) The clause 5(ii) of Circular No.6 of 2023 bearing F.No.370133/06/2023-TPL, dated 24.05.2023 of the first respondent is declared as illegitimate, arbitrary, and ultra vires the Constitution of India; (ii) The respondents are directed to consider the applications submitted by the 4 S.S. Foundation petitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider the same and pass orders thereon on merits, in accordance with law within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; 8. Respectfully following the same, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. CIT(E) to consider the application on merits without raising the issue of timeline.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our above order.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 10th September, 2024.