Incorrect clause in Form 10AB held curable, with charitable registration and 80G approval remanded for fresh consideration.

An incorrect clause selected in Form 10AB for charitable registration under the post-amendment regime was treated as a curable technical lapse, not a fatal defect. The ITAT held that the application for final registration under section 12A(1)(ac) should be reconsidered on merits after hearing the assessee, and the rejection was set aside with remand to the Commissioner. Because approval under section 80G depended on the registration outcome, that rejection was also remanded for fresh adjudication. The matter was restored for reconsideration under the correct applicable clause, if otherwise eligible.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the rejection of the application for final registration under section 12A(1)(ac) was justified when the assessee had selected an inapplicable clause in Form 10AB; (ii) whether the consequential rejection of the application for approval under section 80G required separate interference.

Issue (i): Whether the rejection of the application for final registration under section 12A(1)(ac) was justified when the assessee had selected an inapplicable clause in Form 10AB.

Analysis: The new registration regime introduced through the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 created multiple categories of registration under section 12A(1)(ac), and incorrect selection of the applicable clause was treated as a curable technical lapse. The assessee had applied under an inapplicable clause, and the matter warranted a fresh consideration on merits after hearing the assessee.

Conclusion: The rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with a direction to consider grant of final registration under the correct applicable clause, if otherwise eligible.

Issue (ii): Whether the consequential rejection of the application for approval under section 80G required separate interference.

Analysis: The refusal of approval under section 80G was dependent on the outcome of the registration issue under section 12AB. Once the registration matter was remanded, the approval issue also could not be sustained independently and had to follow the same course.

Conclusion: The approval issue was also remanded for fresh adjudication.

Final Conclusion: Both matters were restored to the Commissioner for reconsideration, and the appeals were treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Ratio Decidendi: An incorrect clause selected in an application for charitable registration under the post-amendment regime may be treated as a curable technical error, warranting remand for fresh consideration on merits rather than outright rejection.

---