Charitable institution wins appeal after 80G(5)(iii) final approval rejection based on activity timing requirements

ITAT Kolkata allowed the appeal of a charitable institution whose application for final approval under section 80G(5)(iii) was rejected by authorities. The rejection was based on timing requirements for final registration applications following provisional approval. The Tribunal held that after provisional registration is granted, applications cannot be rejected merely because the institution commenced activities prior to provisional approval. The commencement date for activities should be counted from when activities are undertaken after provisional registration. The CIT(Exemption) was directed to grant provisional approval if the institution is otherwise eligible, and CIT(A) must decide the final registration application within three months.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the assessee's application for final approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act was valid and within the prescribed time limits.
2. Whether the assessee, who had commenced activities prior to provisional approval, was eligible for final registration under Section 80G(5)(iii).

Summary:

1. Validity and Timeliness of Application for Final Approval:
The assessee, already registered under Section 80G(5) since 2021, was required to re-apply for approval due to the Amendment Act of 2020. The assessee mistakenly applied for provisional approval under Clause (iv) instead of revalidating the existing approval under Clause (i). The CIT(Exemption) rejected the application for final approval, stating that it was filed after the extended deadline of 30.09.2022 and beyond the prescribed period of six months prior to the expiry of the provisional approval. The Tribunal noted that the relevant provisions required institutions to apply for final registration under Clause (iii) at least six months before the expiry of the provisional approval or within six months of commencing activities, whichever is earlier.

2. Eligibility for Final Registration Despite Prior Activities:
The Tribunal referred to the case of "Tomorrow's Foundation vs. CIT(Exemption)" and similar cases, highlighting that institutions granted provisional approval can apply for final registration regardless of prior activities. The Tribunal emphasized that the CIT(Exemption) misconstrued the CBDT Circulars, which extended deadlines for institutions already registered before the amendment but did not apply to institutions seeking fresh provisional registration under Clause (iv). The Tribunal clarified that institutions granted provisional approval under Clause (iv) are entitled to apply for final registration under Clause (iii) and that the date of activity commencement should be considered post-provisional registration.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal directed the CIT(Exemption) to grant provisional approval under Clause (iii) to the assessee, provided it meets eligibility criteria, and to decide the application for final registration within three months. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

---