SHASHVAT PAEDIATRIC CARE FOUNDATION,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, PUNE

The long and short of the case is that; the appellant’s application dt. 19/04/2022 for provisional registration u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act was accepted by the respondent Revenue and certificate to that effect vide order dt. 12/05/2022 was issued. Said provisional registration was in force and valid upto assessment year 2024-25. In ITAT/Pune Page 1 of 5

Shashvat Paediatric Care Foundation Vs CIT(E) Act, the assessees vide its application No. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE/2023/ 24/12AA/11360 dt. 31/03/2023 applied for regular/final 80G approval/registration, this application however by the impugned order is rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) in limine on the grounds of limitation.

In view of the Ld. CIT(E), since the appellant had already commenced its activities much before the issue of provisional registration, hence was under obligation to file an application seeking regular 80G registration within a period of six months therefrom i.e. on or before 04/11/2022. It is further the case of the Revenue that, delayed application filed was even beyond the extended time allowed by CBDT Circular 08/2022 dt. 30/09/2022. Thus said application of the appellant was barred by limitation and in absence of statutory provision empowering condonation of delay the application deserved rejection in the light of decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in ‘All Angels Educational Society Vs CCIT’ [WP/4969/2014] and the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of ‘UP Vs Harish Chandra [AIR 1996 SC 2173]; further ‘Union of India Vs Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. [1996 taxmann.com 575 (SC)]

Aggrieved assessee brought up the present appeal before Tribunal on two argumentative legal grounds which we found are inconsonance with rule 8 of ITAT Rules, 1963. These twin grounds however solitarily allege the action of the respondent Revenue as erroneous & contra-legem, which without touching merits calls for adjudication on the grounds of limitation and violation of principle of natural justice.

Heard rival contentions of both the parties; and subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT/Rules, 1963 perused material placed on record and case laws relied.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the material available on record. It remained undisputed that, the appellant was granted a provisional registration u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act on 12/05/2022, and therefore was under obligation to file form 10AB for regular/final registration by 04/11/2022 or before the expiry of six months in terms of clause (iii) of first proviso to s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act. The appellant’s application dt. 31/03/2023 for grant of regular registration was however admittedly filed after the expiry of former stipulate period. As a result, the application was rejected by the Revenue in limine on threefold grounds viz; (i) the application is barred by limitation, (ii) the appellant was not entitled to the extended time period in terms of circular 08/2023 dt. 24/05/2023 and (iii) absence of explicit provision/power to condone the delay in filing application for regular/final registration.

There is no dispute over (i) and (iii) reasoning of founded by the Ld. CIT(E), the solitarily question therefore remains over applicability of circular 08/2023 in cases where provisional approval u/c (iv) of first proviso to s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act is granted.

Without reproducing lock stock and barrel of section 80G, it shall be purposive to state in the context of time limit that, there is no provision in the statute empowering condonation of delay in filing forms like 10A/10AB etc. by the registering authority. However, the CBDT invoking its power u/s 119 of the Act in first place extended the time limit within which the application for regular registration is to be filed to 30th ITAT/Pune Page 3 of 5

In the present case before us, reading from para 3 of impugned order it as an undisputed fact that the appellant assessee was granted a provisional registration u/c (iv) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by an order u/c (vi) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by the Ld. CIT(E). Therefore, there remains no reason to draw out appellant’s case from claiming benefit of extended period for filing application for regular registration.

Further the circular (supra) also clarified that the extended period upto 30/09/2023 shall apply even in cases, (i) where the application was rejected by the CIT(E) on or before issuance of this circular dated 24/05/2023 (ii) where due date for making/filing application has expired, on or before 30/09/2023. In addition to above, in reply to a specific query, one of the Trustee/founder members appearing for the ITAT/Pune Page 4 of 5

We find in similar facts & circumstance, the co-ordinate benches allowed benefit of extended time period in; ‘Swachh Vapi Mission Trust Vs CIT(E)’ [70 CCH 188] ‘TB Lulla Charitable Foundation Vs CIT(E)’ [70 CCH 176], and ‘Gujarat Hira Bourse & Ors’ [70 CCH 33], ‘Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust’ [226 TTJ 961].

In view of the above and maintaining parity with the decisions on the subject matter, rejection of appellant’s application on the ground of limitation in our considered view is without appreciating the facts in its entirety and devoid of subsisting circular (supra), hence deserves to be set-aside, ergo ordered accordingly. Resultantly, without commenting on merits of the case, we remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to treat appellant’s application dt. 31/03/2023 as filed within the time limit prescribed u/c (iii) to first proviso to s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act r.w.c. 06/2023 (supra) and adjudicate the same on merits in accordance with law.

In result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. U/r 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Thursday 14th day of March, 2024.