BRAHMAN SABHA KARVEER,MAHARASHTRA vs. CIT EXEMPTION PUNE, CIT EXEMPTION PUNE

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal, arise against the CIT

(Exemption), Pune, Pune’s Din and Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1062988098(1), dated 20.03.2024, involving proceedings u/s.80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s

behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

department’s side represented by the learned DR that the

CIT(E) herein has declined the assessee’s sec.80G registration

2 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 application filed on 20.03.2024 mainly on the ground that the

same is time barred. We find in this factual backdrop that the

learned CIT(E) has passed his impugned order ex-parte

thereby taking cognizance of the assessee’s failure in filing all

the relevant details so far as it’s sec.80G(5) registration is

concerned. Mr. Patel vehemently argued during the course of

hearing that the CIT(E) has rightly declined the assessee’s

foregoing application both on account of it’s non-compliance

as well as on limitation aspect as under :

“2.1. If you are engaged in running educational

institution(s), please furnish the following: COME TAX

DEPARTIR

i. Details of various institutes / schools / colleges

run by the trust with granted/non-granted

status.

ii. Copies of affiliation certificates.

iii. Details of institute wise fee structure, admission

policy in respect of each of the institute. If

grants are received, copies of grant sanction

letter for each of such institute.

iv. Institute-wise Income & Expenditure and

Receipt & Payment account for the last 3 years.

v. Complete Financial statements for the last 3

years with all Schedules / Annexures.

3 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 vi. Copies of Audit report for the last 3 years. vii. Details of admissions given to students from

financially weaker sections of the society with

evidence and RTE norms followed with

evidence. viii. Institute-wise details of ownership of land and

building for with evidence. If rented, copy of

rent agreement and proof of ownership of the

owner. ix. Furnish details as to whether the land is owned

by the persons covered u/s 13(3) of the Act. x. Institute-wise details of immovable properties

and building constructions appearing in balance

sheet. xi. Detailed list of salary payments to teaching and

non- teaching staff along with TDS made, PF

deducted, Profession Tax Deducted and copies

of TDS returns & Profession Tax Returns filed

for the last 3 years. xii. Year-wise details of addition to building fund

and other funds with evidence of its source. xiii. Complete details of loans raised for the last 3

years and its utilization for each of the

institution / project along with copy of

permission under section 36A of The

4 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 from the

Charity Commissioner.

2.2. If you are engaged in running a

hospital/nursing home/health care centre, please furnish

the following : a) Copy of permission certificate from the

prescribed

authority.

b) As to how and what provisions of the scheme

defined by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in

the order dated 17/08/2006 in writ petition

(PIL) No. 3132/2004 are followed by you with

evidence, in respect of effective implementation

of the provisions under section 41-AA of The

Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. c) Details of actual free services/ concessional

services provided to patients from financially

weaker sections of the society with evidence

and State Government norms followed, with

evidence in respect of Charitable Hospitals.

d) Copy of separate bank account maintained for

this purpose.

e) Detailed list of Doctors, Nurses and staff along

with their qualification (with proof), complete

residential address, salary paid / payable

5 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 during the year, TDS made, PF and Professional

Tax deducted with evidence for the last 3 years.

2.3. You are hereby further requested to ensure that:

i. Self-certified copies of attachments as per the

provisions of Rule 11AA(2) of the Income Tax Rules,

1962, as applicable, are required to be submitted.

Please also note that the application cannot be

approved unless these attachments, whichever

applicable in your case, are submitted. In absence of

the same, your application will be liable to be

rejected which may also result in cancellation of your

registration / approval, if any."

2.1. The information/details were called for under

the provisions of sub- clause (a) of clause (ii) of second

proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

These are the basic details required to ascertain the

overall nature of the activities of the assessee and are

directly relevant to the present proceedings. The assessee

was requested to submit compliance by 08/03/2024. The

notice was duly served on the assessee through e-portal

and email.

notice was issued on 11/03/2024 requesting it to submit

compliance by 18/03/2024. The assessee was requested

6 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

to show cause as to why its application should not be

rejected and the approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be cancelled. The

assessee was specifically informed that in the event of

failure to comply by the due date, the application shall be

liable to be rejected and the registration / approval shall

also be liable to be cancelled. The assessee was also given

opportunity of being heard. The said notice was duly

served on the assessee through e-portal and email.

3.1. However, the assessee neither furnished any

compliance to the said notice nor availed the opportunity of

being heard.

called for under the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause

(ii) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax

Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the

institution / fund and fulfillment of conditions laid down in

clauses (i) to (v) of Section 80G(5) of the Act.

4.1. The information called for is basic information

required to ascertain the overall nature of activities of the

assessee and are directly relevant to the present

proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to submit

such details/information despite giving sufficient

opportunity as discussed above. In absence of the

7 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

compliance to the above requirement, it is not possible to

arrive at any conclusion about the genuineness of

activities of the assessee and fulfillment of conditions laid

down in clauses (i) to (v) of Section 80G(5) of the Act.

4.2. It is clear that the assessee was given sufficient

opportunity to comply, but it has failed to comply. It seems

that the assessee is not having any supporting documents

/evidence to submit. The assessee has failed to comply

with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second

proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and

hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory

conclusion about genuineness of activities of the assessee

and fulfillment of conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v)

of Section 80G(5) of the Act and has left no alternative but

to reject the application.

was specifically requested to furnish the date of

commencement of activities vide the initial notice itself but

has not furnished the same. Although the assessee has

not informed the date of commencement of activities, it is

seen that the date of incorporation of the trust/institution

as per column No.4b of application in Form No.10AB is

08/10/1943 and it is also seen from the financial

statements that expenditure on objects is shown right from

8 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

the F.Y. 2020-21. Therefore, it is clear that the activities

were commenced long back from F.Y. 2020-21.

approval under section 80G(5)(vi) read with clause (iv) of

first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

submitted by the assessee, the date of provisional

approval is 16/08/2022.

As per the provisions of clause (iii) of first proviso to

section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where a trust

or institution has been provisionally approved under

section under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, the application

for regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) is required to

be filed within 6 months from the date of commencement

of activities. Since, the activities of the assessee were

already commenced before the date of provisional

approval, the assessee was required to file the present

application within 6 months from the date of provisional

approval i.e. on or before 15/02/2023. The extended due

date for filing of such application was 30/09/2022 as per

CBDT, Circular No.8/2022, dated 31/03/2022, whereas

the present application is filed by the assessee beyond

30/09/2022. Thus, it is seen that the assessee has not

filed the present application within the time limit allowed

under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the

9 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

Income Tax Act, 1961. Considering the above, the

application itself is invalid.

assessee is hereby rejected and the provisional approval

dated 16/08/2022 under section 80G(5)(vi) read with

clause (iv) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is

hereby cancelled.”

assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s foregoing vehement

contentions. We are of the considered view that so far as the

Revenue’s stand that the assessee’s sec.80G application being

time barred is concerned, this tribunal in T B Lulla Charitable

Foundation, Sangli vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

ITA.No.1220/PUN./2023 dated 05.01.2024 has already held

such an application as not time barred as follows :

“Findings and analysis:

Tax(Exemption) has rejected the application of the

assessee dated 08/04/2023 filed in Form 10AB for

approval u/s 80G of the Act, only on one ground that the

application has been filed beyond six months of

commencement of activities and hence held it as time

barred. The ld.CIT(E) held as under :

10 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

“8. Considering the above facts, the present

application filed in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of

first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act is liable to be

rejected without going into the merits since the

assessee has not filed the present application within

the time limit allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso

to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

assessee is hereby rejected without going into the

merits of the case and the provisional approval

granted on 09/07/2021 under clause (iv) for first

proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

is hereby cancelled.”

2.1 The Commissioner of Income tax (Exemption) has not

discussed the merits of the case. He held that the

application is not maintainable.

Provisional Approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act vide orders

dated 09/07/2021 for period from A.Y.2021-22 to

A.Y.2023-24 and dated 22/09/2022for period from

A.Y.2023-24 to A.Y.2025-26. The assessee has approval

u/s.12A(1)(ac) of the Act dated 30.01.2019.(copy filed by

assessee in the paper book).

11 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

the application of the assessee was time barred or not?

To decide this question, we have to first understand

the relevant statutory provisions of the Income Tax Act.

4.1 The relevant part of Section 80G(5) of the Income tax

Act is reproduced here as under :

80G. (1) In computing the total income of an assessee,

there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to

the provisions of this section,—

(i) …

(ii) …..

(2) The sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the

following, namely :—

(a) ……..

(b) …………..

(c) …………………

(d)………….

(4) ……………………….

(5) This section applies to donations to any institution or

fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-

section (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable

purpose and if it fulfils the following conditions, namely :—

(i) where the institution or fund derives any income,

such income would not be liable to inclusion in its total

12 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

income under the provisions of sections 11 and 12 or

clause (23AA) or clause (23C) of section 10 :

Provided that where an institution or fund

derives any income, being profits and gains of

business, the condition that such income would not be

liable to inclusion in its total income under the

provisions of section 11 shall not apply in relation to

such income, if—

(a) the institution or fund maintains separate books

of account in respect of such business;

(b) the donations made to the institution or fund are

not used by it, directly or indirectly, for the

purposes of such business; and

(c) the institution or fund issues to a person making

the donation a certificate to the effect that it

maintains separate books of account in respect of

such business and that the donations received by

it will not be used, directly or indirectly, for the

purposes of such business;

(ii) the instrument under which the institution or fund is

constituted does not, or the rules governing the

institution or fund do not, contain any provision for the

transfer or application at any time of the whole or any

13 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 part of the income or assets of the institution or fund

for any purpose other than a charitable purpose;

(iii) the institution or fund is not expressed to be for the

benefit of any particular religious community or caste;

(iv) the institution or fund maintains regular accounts of

its receipts and expenditure;

(v) the institution or fund is either constituted as a public

charitable trust or is registered under the Societies

Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or under any law

corresponding to that Act in force in any part of India or

under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of

1956), or is a University established by law, or is any

other educational institution recognised by the

Government or by a University established by law, or

affiliated to any University established by law, or is an

institution financed wholly or in part by the

Government or a local authority;

(vi) in relation to donations made after the 31st day

of March, 1992, the institution or fund is for the

time being approved by the Principal

Commissioner or Commissioner; (emphasis

supplied)

(vii)…………

(viii) ……….

(ix)…………..

14 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

Provided that the institution or fund referred to

in clause (vi) shall make an application in the

prescribed form and manner to the Principal

Commissioner or Commissioner, for grant of

approval,—

(i) where the institution or fund is approved under

clause (vi) [as it stood immediately before its

amendment by the Taxation and Other Laws

(Relaxation and Amendment of Certain

Provisions) Act, 2020], within three months from

the 1st day of April, 2021;

(ii) where the institution or fund is approved and the

period of such approval is due to expire, at least

six months prior to expiry of the said period;

(iii) where the institution or fund has been

provisionally approved, at least six months prior

to expiry of the period of the provisional approval

or within six months of commencement of its

activities, whichever is earlier; (emphasis

supplied)

(iv) in any other case, where activities of the institution or

fund have––

15 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

(A) not commenced, at least one month prior to the

commencement of the previous year relevant to the

assessment year from which the said approval is

sought;

(B) commenced and where no income or part thereof

of the said institution or fund has been excluded

from the total income on account of applicability of

sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or

sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section

10 or section 11 or section 12 for any previous

year ending on or before the date of such

application, at any time after the commencement of

such activities:]

Provided further that the Principal Commissioner

or Commissioner, on receipt of an application made under

the first proviso, shall,—

(i) where the application is made under clause (i) of the

said proviso, pass an order in writing granting it

approval for a period of five years;

(ii) where the application is made under clause (ii) or

clause (iii) [or sub-clause (B) of clause (iv)] of the said

proviso,—

16 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

(a) call for such documents or information from it or

make such inquiries as he thinks necessary in

order to satisfy himself about—

(A) the genuineness of activities of such

institution or fund; and

(B) the fulfilment of all the conditions laid down

in clauses (i) to (v);

(b) after satisfying himself about the genuineness of

activities under item (A), and the fulfilment of all

the conditions under item (B), of sub-clause (a),—

(A) pass an order in writing granting it approval

for a period of five years; or

(B) if he is not so satisfied, pass an order in

writing,––

(I) in a case referred to in clause (ii) or

clause (iii) of the first proviso, rejecting such

application and cancelling its approval; or

(II) in a case referred to in sub-clause (B) of

clause (iv) of the first proviso, rejecting such

application, after affording it a reasonable

opportunity of being heard;]

(iii) …….

17 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption),Pune in

the case of the Assessee held that the Activities of the

Assessee had commenced in 18/01/2014, hence the

assessee was liable to make application for Approval u/s

80G of the Act to file the present application within six

months from the date of provisional approval i.e. on or

before 08.01.2022 whereas the present application filed

by the assessee on 08.04.2023 i.e.beyond the time limit

allowed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5)

of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the ld.CIT(E) held it to be time

barred.

New Procedure for registration:

Finance Act, 2020. There was amendment in the

registration procedure by Finance Act, 2020. For the first

time the Finance Act, 2020 introduced the concept of

“Provisional Approval”. Also due to the amendment, all the

existing Trust/Institutions which were already having

registration u/s12AA or 80G(5) were asked to re-apply for

registration as per the amendment brought in 2020 and a

date was specified before which all those

Trust/Institutions already having Registration was

required to make a fresh application as per the

amendment procedure.

18 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the

Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister.

7.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P

Varghese Vs. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as

under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in

interpretation :

Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by

the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the

House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision

is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of

interpreting the statutory provision but the speech

made by the mover of the Bill explaining the reason

for the introduction of the Bill can certainly be

referred to for the purpose of ascertaining the

mischief sought to be remedied by the legislation and

the object and purpose for which the legislation is

enacted. This is an accord with the recent trend in

juristic thought not only in western countries but also

in India that interpretation of a statute being an

exercise in the ascertainment of meaning, everything

which is logically relevant should be admissible. In

fact there are at least three decisions of this Court,

one in Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT

19 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

[1975] 101 ITR 234, the other in Indian Chamber of

Commerce v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 796 and the third in

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers

Association [1980] 121 ITR l/[1980] 2 Taxman 501,

where the speech made by the Finance Minister,

while introducing the exclusionary clause in section

2(15) of the Act, was relied upon by the Court for the

purpose of ascertaining what was the reason for

introducing that clause.”

7.2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has approved use

of the Hon’ble Minister’s speech as tool of interpretation to

understand the intent of the Statute.

Extract of relevant part of Speech of Hon’ble Finance

Minister:

has said as under :

Quote “In order to simplify the compliance for the

new and existing charity institutions, I propose to

make the process of registration completely electronic

under which a unique registration number (URN)

shall be issued to all new and existing charity

institutions. Further, to facilitate the registration of

the new charity institution which is yet to start their

20 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 charitable activities, I propose to allow them

provisional registration for three years. ” Unquote.

Finance Bill 2020 :

“(vi) an entity making fresh application for approval

under clause (23C) of section 10, for registration

under section 12AA, for approval under section 80G

shall be provisionally approved or registered for three

years on the basis of application without detailed

enquiry even in the cases where activities of the

entity are yet to begin and then it has to apply again

for approval or registration which, if granted, shall be

valid from the date of such provisional registration.

The application of registration subsequent to

provisional registration should be at least six months

prior to expiry of provisional registration or within six

months of start of activities, whichever is earlier”

the procedure of registration of Charitable

Trusts/Institutions. The amendment made to simplify a

procedure cannot be interpreted in a way that it causes

prejudice to the Trust/institutions.

Hon’ble Finance Minister 2020 and the Memorandum of

Finance Bill, 2020 together, it becomes clear that the

21 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

concept of Provisional registration was mainly to facilitate

the registration of newly formed Trust/Institutions which

have not yet begun the activities. The parliament in its

wisdom has decided to differentiate between the Trust

which were newly formed and the trust which were

already doing charitable activities. In the second category

of cases, there are again two possibilities, one trust was

already doing charitable activities and was already

having Registration u/s 12AA or 80G(5) of the Act, such

trust were directed to re-apply for registration under new

procedure on or before 30th August, 2020 but due to Covid-

19 this date was subsequently extended. There is Second

category of trust/institutions which were already doing

Charitable Activities but had never applied for registration

u/s.80G(5) of the Act. It is not mandatory that every

charitable trust/institution has to apply for registration

u/s.80G(5) of the Act. However, there is no bar in the Act

that such trust or institutions cannot apply for registration

u/s.80G in the new procedure. In these kinds of cases, the

Trust/Institute though doing charitable activity may apply

first for the ‘Provisional Registration ‘under the Act. After

getting the Provisional Registration the Trust/Institution

have to apply for Regular Registration. These kind of

Trust/Institutes will fall under sub clause (iii) of the

22 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024 Proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act, since they have

obtained Provisional registration.

10.1. In this background, we need to read the sub-

clause (iii) of the Proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act. For

ready reference it is again reproduced here under :

“iii) where the institution or fund has been

provisionally approved, at least six months prior to

expiry of the period of the provisional approval or

within six months of commencement of its activities,

whichever is earlier”

10.2. The sub-clause says that the Institution which

have provisional registration have to apply at-least six

months prior to expiry of the provisional registration or

within Six months of commencement of activities,

whichever is earlier.

10.3. In continuation of this when we read the ‘sub

clause iii of Proviso’ of section 80G(5), which we have

already reproduced above, it is clear that the intention of

parliament in putting the word “or within six months of

commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier”

is in the context of the newly formed Trust/institutions. For

the existing Trust/Institution, the time limit for applying for

Regular Registration is within six months of expiry of

Provisional registration if they are applying under sub

23 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

clause (iii) of the Proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act. This

will be the harmonious interpretation.

ld.CIT(E), then say a trust which was formed in the year

2000, performed charitable activities since 2000, but did

not applied for registration u/s.80G, the said trust will

never be able to apply for registration now. This in our

opinion is not the intention of the legislation. This

interpretation leads to absurd situation.

11.1 In this context, we will like to refer to observations

of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P

Varghase(supra), where in Hon’ble Supreme Court

observed as under :

Quote, “It is a well recognised rule of construction

that a statutory provision must be so construed, if

possible, that absurdity and mischief may be

avoided. There are many situations where the

construction suggested on behalf of the revenue

would lead to a wholly unreasonable result which

could never have been intended by the Legislature.

Take, for example, a case where A agrees to sell his

property to B for a certain price and before the sale is

completed pursuant to the agreement and it is quite

well known that sometimes the completion of the sale

24 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

may take place even a couple of years after the date

of the agreement - the market price shoots up with

the result that the market price prevailing on the date

of the sale exceeds the agreed price at which the

property is sold by more than 15 per cent of such

agreed price. This is not at all an uncommon case in

an economy of rising prices and in fact we would find

in a large number of cases where the sale is

completed more than a year or two after the date of

the agreement that the market price prevailing on the

date of the sale is very much more than the price at

which the property is sold under the agreement. Can

it be contended with any degree of fairness and

justice that in such cases, where there is clearly no

understatement of consideration in respect of the

transfer and the transaction is perfectly honest and

bona fide and, in fact, in fulfilment of a contractual

obligation, the asses-see who has sold the property

should be liable to pay tax on capital gains which

have not accrued or arisen to him. It would indeed be

most harsh and inequitable to tax the assessee on

income which has neither arisen to him nor is

received by him, merely because he has carried out

the contractual obligation undertaken by him. It is

difficult to conceive of any rational reason why the

25 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

Legislature should have thought it fit to impose

liability to tax on an assessee who is bound by law

to carry out his contractual obligation to sell the

property at the agreed price and honestly carries out

such contractual obligation. It would indeed be

strange if obedience to the law should attract the levy

of tax on income which has neither arisen to the

assessee nor has been received by him. If we may

take another illustration, let us consider a case

where A sells his property to B with a stipulation that

after sometime, which may be a couple of years or

more, he shall resell the property to A for the same

price. Could it be contended in such a case that when

B transfers the property to A for the same price at

which he originally purchased it, he should be liable

to pay tax on the basis as if he has received the

market value of the property as on the date of resale,

if, in the mean-while, the market price has shot up

and exceeds the agreed price by more than 15 per

cent. Many other similar situations can be

contemplated where it would be absurd and

unreasonable to apply section 52(2) according to its

strict literal construction. We must, therefore, eschew

literalness in the interpretation of section 52(2) and

try to arrive at an interpretation which avoids this

26 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

absurdity and mischief and makes the provision

rational and sensible, unless of course, our hands

are tied and we cannot find any escape from the

tyranny of the literal interpretation. It is now a well-

settled rule of construction that where the plain literal

interpretation of a statutory provision produces a

manifestly absurd and unjust result which could

never have been intended by the Legislature, the

Court may modify the language used by the

Legislature or even 'do some violence" to it, so as to

achieve the obvious intention of the Legislature and

produce a rational construction -” Unquote.

11.2. Thus, as observed by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court, that the statutory provision shall be interpreted in

such a way to avoid absurdity. In this case to avoid the

absurdity as discussed by us in earlier paragraph, we are

of the opinion that the words, “within six months of

commencement of its activities” has to be interpreted that

it applies for those trusts/institutions which have not

started charitable activities at the time of obtaining

Provisional registration, and not for those trust/institutions

which have already started charitable activities before

obtaining Provisional Registration. We derive the strength

from the Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister and the

Memorandum of Finance Bill, 2020.

27 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

11.3. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances of

the case, we hold that the Assessee Trust had applied for

registration within the time allowed under the Act. Hence,

the application of the assessee is valid and maintainable.

uptoA.Y.2025-26, and it can be cancelled by the ld.CIT(E)

only on the specific violations by the assessee. However,

in this case the ld.CIT(E) has not mentioned about any

violation by the Assessee. Therefore, even on this ground

the rejection is not sustainable.

whether the Assessee fulfils all other conditions mentioned

in the section as he rejected it on technical ground.

Therefore, in these facts and circumstances we hold that

the Assessee had made the application in form 10AB

within the prescribed time limit and hence it is valid

application. Therefore, we direct the ld.CIT(E) to treat the

application has filed within statutory time and verify

assessee’s eligibility as per the Act. The ld.CIT(E) shall

grant opportunity to the assessee. Assessee shall be at

liberty to file all the necessary documents before the

ld.CIT(E).

allowed for statistical purpose. Since we have set aside to

28 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

Ld.CIT(E), we do not intend to adjudicate each ground

separately.

statistical purpose.”

merits is concerned, we are of the considered view that it’s

failure in filing all the relevant particulars in light of some

circumstances beyond it’s control including communication

gaps etc., could also not be altogether ruled-out. Faced with

this situation, we direct the learned CIT(E) to re-decide the

assessee’s instant sec.80G application afresh on merits as per

law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing,

subject to the rider that it shall be the assessee’s onus and

responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in

consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30.08.2023.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMA KANTA PANDA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER

Pune, Dated 30th August, 2024

VBP/-

29 ITA.No.795/PUN./2024

Copy of the Order forwarded to :

BY ORDER,

// TRUE COPY //

Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Pune.