Section 12AB registration cannot be denied for lack of RPT Act registration, and section 80G delay may be condoned.

Non-registration under the RPT Act, 1959 cannot by itself be treated as a bar to registration under section 12AB, because the two statutes operate in separate fields. The Tribunal also held that registration could not be denied merely on the footing that the applicant was a private trust, where its objects were not confined to a closed class and the record did not support a finding of nongenuine activities. On the section 80G request, the objection based on prior refusal of section 12AB registration failed, and the filing delay was condoned in light of the applicable CBDT circular. The applications were directed to be allowed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether non-registration under the RPT Act, 1959 could be treated as a valid ground to deny registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961; (ii) Whether the applicant could be denied registration under section 12AB on the ground that it was a private trust and on the ground of alleged lack of genuineness of activities; (iii) Whether the application for approval under section 80G could be rejected for want of prior rejection of registration under section 12AB and for alleged delay in filing the application.

Issue (i): Whether non-registration under the RPT Act, 1959 could be treated as a valid ground to deny registration under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate-bench view that the RPT Act, 1959 does not create a condition precedent for registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The two enactments operate in their own fields, and absence of registration under the RPT Act cannot be used to refuse registration under section 12AB.

Conclusion: The objection based on non-registration under the RPT Act, 1959 was rejected and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant could be denied registration under section 12AB on the ground that it was a private trust and on the ground of alleged lack of genuineness of activities.

Analysis: On the stated objects, the applicant's activities were found not to be confined to any particular caste, creed, religion, colour, or closed class of persons, and therefore the finding that it was not meant for the public at large was held unsustainable. As to genuineness, the record showed that the applicant had furnished the relevant financial material and that the activity reflected in the initial years, including scholarship support, did not justify an inference of nongenuine activities, particularly when the assessee explained the commencement of financial activity in the relevant year.

Conclusion: The findings that the applicant was a private trust and that its activities were not genuine were set aside in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether the application for approval under section 80G could be rejected for want of prior rejection of registration under section 12AB and for alleged delay in filing the application.

Analysis: Once the refusal of registration under section 12AB was displaced, the dependent objection to section 80G approval could not survive. The Tribunal also accepted the extended timelines reflected in the CBDT circular and adopted a liberal approach to condone the delay in filing the approval application.

Conclusion: The section 80G objection failed and the delay in filing was condoned in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's applications for registration under section 12AB and for approval under section 80G were directed to be granted, and the connected appeals were allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Absence of registration under an external enactment cannot, by itself, defeat registration under section 12AB when the statutory requirements of the Income-tax Act are otherwise satisfied, and procedural delay in a section 80G application may be condoned where the governing administrative circular permits a liberal approach.

---