Technical Mistake in Clause Invocation allowed; fresh application under the correct sub-clause must be permitted and registration considered.

Where an applicant substantively satisfied the proviso's requirements for provisional approval but mistakenly cited the wrong proviso sub-clause, that clerical/technical error does not defeat registration; the correct approach is to permit a fresh application under the appropriate sub-clause and to consider and grant registration on its merits. The operative principle prioritises substantive eligibility over a mis referenced sub clause, directing authorities to accept and adjudicate the corrected application rather than cancelling provisional approval solely for the technical mistake.

---

---

Issues: Whether registration under section 80G should be denied where the applicant mistakenly invoked an incorrect sub-clause in the application despite being substantively eligible, and whether the assessee should be permitted to file a fresh application under the correct sub-clause.

Analysis: The issue involves interpretation of the proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G and its sub-clauses concerning provisional approval where activities had commenced earlier. The authorities below cancelled provisional approval on the ground that the application invoked sub-clause (A) whereas the facts required sub-clause (B). The matter requires addressing whether a clerical or technical mistake in citing the proviso clause, without affecting substantive eligibility, justifies denial of registration, and whether the appropriate remedy is permitting a fresh application to be considered on its merits under the correct sub-clause.

Conclusion: The mistake in specifying the incorrect sub-clause is a technical/inadvertent error and is not a ground to deny registration; direction issued to permit filing of a fresh application under sub-clause (B) and to consider and grant registration in accordance with law. (Decision in favour of the assessee.)

---