Section 80G registration denied without section 12AB approval; appeal delay condoned for substantial justice

The ITAT Mumbai condoned a 128-day delay in filing appeal, applying the principle that procedural rules serve justice and substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The assessee's registration under section 80G was denied as it lacked registration under section 12AB/12A(1)(ac) or approval under section 10(23C). Following precedent from assessee's own case, the tribunal restored the section 80G application to CIT(E) for fresh consideration after decision on section 12AB application, ensuring adequate hearing opportunity.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the challenge against an order passed under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune. The main issues include the delay in filing the appeal, denial of registration under section 80G of the Act, and the restoration of the application for approval under section 80G.

Delay in filing the appeal:
The appellant filed an appeal challenging the order dated 29/03/2023 under section 80G(5) of the Act, delayed by 128 days. The reasons for the delay were explained, including the inadvertent selection of an incorrect code during the application process. The appellant sought condonation of the delay, citing the new regime's limitations in reapplying for approval under section 80G. The Tribunal, considering the parameters for granting condonation, found sufficient cause for the delay and thus condoned the delay.

Denial of registration under section 80G:
The appellant, a trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950, was denied registration under section 80G of the Act. The denial was based on the grounds that the appellant was neither registered under specific sections nor approved under relevant clauses, thus not meeting the conditions of section 80G(5)(i) of the Act. During the hearing, the appellant presented a previous order from a coordinate bench, which highlighted discrepancies in the communication of show cause notices. The Tribunal, in line with the previous decision, set aside the impugned order and directed the Commissioner to reconsider the appellant's application for approval under section 80G after deciding on the application for approval under section 12AB of the Act.

Restoration of the application for approval under section 80G:
Based on the findings of the coordinate bench in a previous case involving the appellant, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the appellant's application for approval under section 80G to the file of the Commissioner. The direction was to consider the application afresh after deciding on the application for approval under section 12AB of the Act. The impugned order was set aside, and the grounds raised by the appellant were allowed for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the issues of delay in filing the appeal and denial of registration under section 80G of the Act. The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural rules in the administration of justice and granted relief to the appellant based on the specific circumstances and previous decisions.

---