Earlier trust registration of 28.05.2021 treated as final, not provisional; no remand under Sections 12A/12AB
ITAT (Kolkata) held that the trust's earlier registration dated 28.05.2021 was a regular/final registration, not provisional, and that the Tribunal's earlier observation arose from an incorrect Form 10AC entry. In view of CBDT Circular No. 11/2022 treating provisional registration as regular under sections 12A/12AB, there was no need to remit the matter to the CIT(Exemption). The Tribunal acknowledged an inadvertent error on its record and declined to set aside the order for further adjudication.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED
1. Whether the Tribunal's order may be recalled on the ground of a mistake apparent on the record arising from an incorrect factual assumption regarding the nature (provisional v. final) of registration recorded in Form No.10AC.
2. Whether a trust already registered under section 12A before 01.04.2021 was required to apply for final registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) after obtaining Form No.10AC under section 12A(1)(ac)(i), or whether the Form No.10AC issued in FY 2021-22 must be treated as final/regular registration.
3. Effect of Board Circular No.11/2022 (3 June 2022) on Form No.10ACs issued in FY 2021-22 that bear the heading "Order for provisional registration/approval" due to technical glitch - i.e., whether such forms are to be read as orders for registration/approval and construed as regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) read with section 12AB(1)(a).
4. Maintainability and disposition of an appeal filed by an assessee seeking final/regular registration where the earlier Form No.10AC has, by operation of the Circular, to be treated as regular/final registration.
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS
Issue 1 - Recall of Tribunal order for mistake apparent on record
Legal framework: Principles permitting recall/rectification of judicial orders for mistake apparent on record; the Tribunal's power to correct inadvertent errors when subsequent clarificatory developments render a prior assumption incorrect.
Precedent Treatment: The Tribunal has on prior occasions corrected orders where an underlying factual or legal premise was shown to be incorrect by subsequent authoritative clarification.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal's earlier order set aside the revenue authority's rejection on the basis that the authority had treated the earlier Form No.10AC as provisional and that there was no bar to seeking final registration. That direction was founded upon a factual assumption (the issuance being provisional) traceable to the wording in Form No.10AC. The Board's Circular No.11/2022 subsequently clarifies that such Form No.10ACs, issued in FY 2021-22 with headings erroneously stating "provisional", shall be read and construed as orders for registration/approval (i.e., regular registration). The Tribunal therefore recognized that its earlier direction was premised on a misunderstanding created by the form's heading and that the Circular eliminated that misunderstanding.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - the Tribunal properly exercised its power to recall its earlier order where the factual basis for its direction was negated by subsequent authoritative clarification; Obiter - general remarks on the propriety of filing applications notwithstanding validity periods.
Conclusion: The Tribunal recalled its order as an inadvertent and apparent error existed in light of the Board Circular, and recall was appropriate to prevent an order inconsistent with the clarified legal-factual position.
Issue 2 - Nature of Form No.10AC issued under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) and requirement to apply under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)
Legal framework: Section 12A(1)(ac)(i) (re-registration/re-registration of institutions already registered under section 12A on or before 01.04.2021) and section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) (provisions relating to grant of final/regular registration following provisional/conditional orders) read with section 12AB(1)(a)/(b)/(c) forming part of the amended registration/approval regime.
Precedent Treatment: The Tribunal has in multiple cases held that applications for final registration may be entertained even before expiry of any provisional period where the applicant seeks regularization; however, that approach was influenced by the state of the Form No.10AC and administrative practice.
Interpretation and reasoning: Where Form No.10AC expressly records an order as "provisional registration" in its title and specified columns, both the assessee and the CIT (Exemption) construed it as provisional and sought/expected an application for final registration. The Tribunal originally allowed an appeal to ensure the application for final registration would be considered. After the Circular, the textual designation "provisional" on Form No.10AC is required to be read as "registration" for forms issued in FY 2021-22; consequently, the statutory purpose of section 12A(1)(ac)(i) is satisfied and no separate application under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) is required for those cases.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - where a Form No.10AC issued in FY 2021-22 is to be construed as an order for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i), no requirement to apply afresh under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) arises; Obiter - commentary that earlier Tribunal decisions permitting premature final-registration applications were responsive to procedural/formal ambiguities rather than to substantive statutory requirement.
Conclusion: The Form No.10AC dated 28.05.2021 must be treated as a final/regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) read with section 12AB(1)(a), removing any obligation on the trust to apply under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in respect of that registration.
Issue 3 - Effect and interpretation of Board Circular No.11/2022 regarding "provisional" wording in Form No.10AC
Legal framework: Administrative clarification by the Board has force as authoritative guidance for the administrative machinery; the Circular identifies reading and substitution rules for conditions and headings of Form No.10AC issued between 01.04.2021 and the date of the Circular.
Precedent Treatment: The Circular resolves widespread practical confusion arising from technical glitches in CPC-generated Form No.10ACs and supplies uniform treatment in line with legislative intent for re-registrations and approvals.
Interpretation and reasoning: Clause 5(ii) of the Circular expressly directs that Form No.10ACs issued in FY 2021-22 with the headings "Order for provisional registration/approval" shall be considered as orders for registration/approval and prescribes textual substitutions in specified rows for section codes relevant to re-registration and re-approval. The Tribunal accepted that the Circular removes the ambiguity and requires that Form No.10ACs bearing "provisional" be construed as regular registration orders for the relevant section codes, including section-code 01 for re-registration.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - the Circular must be applied to read Form No.10ACs of FY 2021-22 as regular registrations/approvals where headings wrongly indicated "provisional"; Obiter - remarks on the administrative genesis of the error and the practical effects on other pending cases.
Conclusion: The Circular conclusively instructs that the earlier forms are to be read as regular registrations; consequently, the registration granted on 28.05.2021 is to be treated as final/regular registration valid up to the stated assessment year.
Issue 4 - Maintainability and disposition of the appeal seeking final registration after Circular clarifying Form No.10AC status
Legal framework: Appeal admissibility depends on the existence of a live controversy and whether the relief sought remains necessary in light of changed facts or clarifications.
Precedent Treatment: Courts/Tribunals dismiss appeals as infructuous where intervening events (statutory amendment, authoritative clarification) render the appeal's grievance moot.
Interpretation and reasoning: The assessee's appeal sought direction/relief to obtain final/regular registration. The Circular mandates that the Form No.10AC in question is to be read as registration valid to AY 2026-27. Thus, the principal relief sought by the assessee was already achieved by operation of the Circular; further adjudication is unnecessary. The Tribunal therefore found the appeal infructuous and not maintainable, while expressly preserving the validity of the registration already granted.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - an appeal becomes infructuous and is dismissible where a subsequent authoritative clarification confers the relief sought; Obiter - cautionary note that dismissal does not affect the subsisting registration rights.
Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed as infructuous and not maintainable because the earlier Form No.10AC must be treated as final/regular registration valid up to AY 2026-27; dismissal does not affect the validity of that registration.
Cross-references and final disposition
Cross-reference: Issues 1-3 are interlinked - the Tribunal's recall (Issue 1) is grounded in the Board's Circular (Issue 3), which determines the legal status of the Form No.10AC (Issue 2) and thereby renders the appeal (Issue 4) infructuous.
Disposition: The miscellaneous application filed by the Department was allowed; the Tribunal's prior order was recalled as based on an inadvertent error apparent on record; the assesee's appeal was dismissed as infructuous without affecting the validity of the registration granted by Form No.10AC dated 28.05.2021 (valid up to the specified assessment year).
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
