TORNA RAJGAD PARISAR SAMAJONNATI NYAS,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AA of the IT Act.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a trust applied for registration in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)-ITEM(B) of the IT Act on 28.03.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirement of any other law for the time being in force by the trust/institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued on 21.05.2024 through ITBA portal requesting the assessee to upload various information detailed in notice. In compliance to the above notice, desired information was furnished by the assessee trust. Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune found that the application was furnished u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) of the IT Act and the assessee trust has claimed exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act, therefore said provisions of section 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) is not applicable in the assessee’s case, accordingly the application filed by the assessee was rejected by him. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before the Bench that the rejection order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune is unjustified. It was submitted that due to a typographical/inadvertent error the application was filed u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi)(B) whereas the assessee was required to file application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the IT Act since it was an old trust already registered u/s 12 of the IT Act and was required to get registration under the new provisions of the IT Act. It was further submitted that application was filed by its own without the help of any tax professional and due to this the above mistake occurred. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the assessee trust is genuine and was already registered u/s 12A w.e.f. 09.07.2002. Accordingly, it was submitted before the Bench that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune ought to have allowed further opportunity to the assessee trust to furnish reply in this regard. But, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune erred in not providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee to submit the clarification in this regard. In support of the above contention, Ld. AR relied on the decision passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shree Swaminarayan Gadi Trust vs. CIT, [2024] 162 taxmann.com 772 (Surat-Trib.) order dated 13.05.2024 wherein under identical situation Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee. Ld. AR further relied on another decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust in order dated 05.06.2024, wherein under similar circumstances, the Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and further requested to direct him to consider the application as filed under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act.

Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue relied on the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and requested to confirm the same.

We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record and also copy of case laws relied on by the assessee. We find that admittedly, the assessee trust was required to file application under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act but due to inadvertent error the application was filed under clause (vi) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act and for this reason alone Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejected its application for registration. We find that under identical situations, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust (supra) allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under :- “9. As contended the appellant has committed a technical mistake in making the application under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. As pointed out the appellant has filed revised form 10AB for seeking registration under the correct provision i.e. Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) which can also be considered.

In consonance with the decision rendered by the co-ordinate Bench, the typographical error deserves to be corrected. Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be allowed and impugned order dated 15.03.2024 of Ld. CIT (E) is liable to be set aside. Hence, the appeal is allowed and we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(E) dated 15-03-2024 and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication by considering amended application of the appellant under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act, or he can call for amended application from the appellant.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.”

Respectfully following the above decision passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal (supra), we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune erred in dismissing the application for registration merely on a technical ground and accordingly we deem it proper to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and direct him to treat the application already filed by the assessee as under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act instead of under clause (vi) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the IT Act and decide the same as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in this regard and produce supporting documents/evidences in support of application for registration, otherwise, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed.