Registration treated as regular after CBDT clarification, making the earlier remand a mistake apparent and the appeal infructuous.
A CBDT clarification on Form No. 10AC altered the position on registration under the Income-tax Act by treating forms issued because of technical glitches as orders of registration. On that basis, the earlier Tribunal remand was found to rest on a mistaken premise and was recalled as a mistake apparent on record. Once the registration granted on 06.04.2022 was treated as regular registration valid up to AY 2026-27, no live dispute remained on final registration, so the appeal against rejection of that application was held infructuous and dismissed for want of maintainability.
Issues: (i) whether the earlier order of the Tribunal suffered from a mistake apparent on record and was liable to be recalled in view of the CBDT circular clarifying the nature of Form No. 10AC issued for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961; (ii) whether the assessee's appeal against rejection of the application for final registration was maintainable after the grant of regular registration.
Issue (i): Whether the earlier order of the Tribunal suffered from a mistake apparent on record and was liable to be recalled in view of the CBDT circular clarifying the nature of Form No. 10AC issued for registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The registration granted in Form No. 10AC had been described as provisional because of the wording used in the form, but the subsequent CBDT Circular No. 11 of 2022 clarified that such forms issued due to technical glitches are to be treated as orders of registration. In that light, the premise on which the earlier remand was made was shown to be mistaken.
Conclusion: The earlier order contained a mistake apparent on record and was recalled.
Issue (ii): Whether the assessee's appeal against rejection of the application for final registration was maintainable after the grant of regular registration.
Analysis: Once the registration granted on 06.04.2022 was treated as regular registration valid up to AY 2026-27, there remained no live dispute requiring a further application for final registration. The appeal therefore ceased to have practical utility.
Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable and was dismissed as infructuous.
Final Conclusion: The Department succeeded in the miscellaneous application, the earlier Tribunal order was set aside by recall, and the assessee's appeal failed for want of maintainability.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory form granting registration is later clarified by the competent authority to operate as a regular registration, an earlier contrary assumption constitutes a mistake apparent on record and any appeal seeking redundant final registration becomes infructuous.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
