Section 80G approval under amended proviso cannot be rejected on the old deadline once clause (iv)(B) applies.

An application for approval under section 80G(5) filed after the earlier cut-off under clause (iii) could not be rejected solely on timeliness once the amended first proviso, including clause (iv)(B), had come into force. The amended provision permits a trust to apply after commencement of activities and operates independently of the earlier filing timeline. The rejection based on the old deadline was therefore not sustainable, and the application had to be considered under the amended framework.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for approval under section 80G(5) filed belatedly under clause (iii) of the first proviso could be treated as an application under clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso after the amendment came into force, and whether the rejection for want of timeliness was sustainable.

Analysis: The application was filed on 31.07.2024 and was rejected as time-barred under the earlier timeline prescribed for clause (iii). The amendment inserting clause (iv) in the first proviso to section 80G(5) had already come into force with effect from 01.10.2024 when the impugned order was passed. That amended provision permits a trust to apply after commencement of activities and operates independently of the earlier clause (iii) timeline. In these circumstances, the rejection of the application as not maintainable on the old cut-off date could not be sustained, and the application required consideration under the amended provision.

Conclusion: The rejection was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner to treat the application as one under clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) and decide it afresh in accordance with law after hearing the assessee.

---