2024 (10) TMI 1268 - AT - Income Tax

Provisional 80G registration holder's regular application deemed timely filed under Circular 08/2023 extended deadline

ITAT Pune allowed the appeal against rejection of regular 80G registration application as time-barred. The assessee had provisional registration and filed ... Rejection of application for grant of regular 80G as time barred - Need to file regular 80G registration within a period of six months therefrom provisional registration granted - HELD THAT:- The appellant assessee was granted a provisional registration u/c (iv) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by an order u/c (vi) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by the Ld. CIT(E). Therefore, there remains no reason to draw out appellant’s case from claiming benefit of extended period for filing application for regular registration. The circular 08/2023 also clarified that the extended period upto 30/09/2023 shall apply even in cases, (i) where the application was rejected by the CIT(E) on or before issuance of this circular dated 24/05/2023 (ii) where due date for making/filing application has expired, on or before 30/09/2023. In addition to above, in reply to a specific query, the appellant spelt out the reasons beyond delayed filing of application, which in our considered view also formed sufficient & reasonable ground to condone the delay. We find in similar facts & circumstance, the co-ordinate benches allowed benefit of extended time period in ‘Rotary Club of Akurdi Charitable Trust’[2024 (10) TMI 1246 - ITAT PUNE], ‘Shashvat Paediatric Care Foundation’[2024 (3) TMI 1365 - ITAT PUNE], ‘Sarathi Youth Foundation’ [2024 (6) TMI 798 - ITAT PUNE], ‘Birmani Charitable Foundation’ [2024 (4) TMI 89 - ITAT PUNE], ‘Swachh Vapi Mission Trust [2024 (3) TMI 614 - ITAT SURAT], ‘TB Lulla Charitable Foundation [2024 (6) TMI 798 - ITAT PUNE] and ‘Gujarat Hira Bourse & Ors’ [2024 (1) TMI 946 - ITAT SURAT],‘Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust’ [2023 (11) TMI 1210 - ITAT JODHPUR]. Thus, we hold the application of the appellant was filed well within the extended time limit and in consequence we set-aside the impugned order of rejection for remand with a direction to treat appellant’s application dt. 22/08/2023 as filed within the time limit prescribed u/c (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act r.w.c. 06/2023 (supra) and adjudicate the same on merits in accordance with law. Issues:1. Delay in filing appeals under sections 12A(1)(ac)(vi) and 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act.2. Rejection of regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) due to deficiencies in documentation.3. Rejection of regular registration under section 80G(5) as being barred by limitation.Analysis:1. The appeals were filed with a delay of 130 days, which was condoned based on accidental and undeliberate reasons, aligning with judicial precedents. The Tribunal heard both appeals together due to identical issues.2. Regarding the rejection of regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi), the registering authority rejected the application due to deficiencies in documentation and failure to cure notified deficiencies. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a thorough examination to ensure compliance with laws and charitable objectives. The rejection was set aside due to insufficient time given to the appellant to rectify the deficiencies, violating the principles of natural justice.3. In the case of rejection of regular registration under section 80G(5), the appellant's application was rejected as being time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the appellant commenced activities before provisional registration and was obligated to file for regular registration within six months. However, the appellant filed the application after the stipulated period. The Tribunal analyzed circulars issued by the CBDT and concluded that the appellant was entitled to an extended time period for filing the application. Citing similar precedents, the Tribunal set aside the rejection and directed the authority to consider the application on its merits.4. The Tribunal allowed both appeals for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of adhering to time limits and ensuring a fair opportunity for compliance. The orders were pronounced in open court, providing relief to the appellant in both cases.