Section 10AB of the Income Tax Act
The decision most relied on for Section 10AB is Mahaveer Prasad Jain v. CIT (172 ITR 331), cited in 48 of the 205 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.
Leading authorities on Section 10AB
A litigant should not be made to suffer adverse consequences solely due to the bona fide mistake or negligence of their counsel, and they must be provided a fair and proper opportunity to present their case on its merits.
The Commissioner is justified in rejecting an application for registration or recognition (e.g., under sections 12A, 12AA, or 80G) if there is no material to establish the genuineness of the trust's activities or if no charitable work has been undertaken during the relevant period.
Registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G are distinct from assessment; issues relevant to assessing income under Section 11 cannot be grounds for rejecting an application for registration or approval.
Substantial justice must prevail over mere procedural technicalities, and rules of procedure or technicalities of law should not obstruct the course of justice. Courts, especially higher courts, can rectify orders passed under a mistake or erroneous assumption, guided by equity and fairness.
A party cannot be made to suffer for the mistake of their counsel. This principle is applied to condone delays in filing appeals when the delay is attributable to the counsel's error.
Judgments on Section 10AB
Showing 1–20 of 205 · Page 1 of 11
