Treatment of portal filings as compliant with the required subclause to secure five-year registration, subject to document call and hearing.

Where portal limitations during an interim transition prevented selection of the statutory subclause entitling applicants to automatic five-year registration, filings made under the incorrect subclause are to be treated as compliant with the intended subclause and remitted for processing as such; authorities are directed to call for documents and afford hearings before deciding grant of registration for five years from AY 2022 23. Separately, an ex parte rejection of a regular registration application in these circumstances is set aside and the matter restored for fresh consideration with opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application electronically filed under clause (vi) of Section 12A(1)(ac) during a 'grey period' and due to portal limitations can be treated as having been filed under sub clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac) so as to entitle the applicant to registration under Section 12AB(1)(a) for five years from AY 2022 23; (ii) Whether an ex parte rejection of an application for regular registration under Section 12AB warrants setting aside and restoration for fresh processing in view of principles of natural justice.

Issue (i): Treatment of the electronically filed application under Section 12A(1)(ac) and entitlement to registration under Section 12AB(1)(a) for five years.

Analysis: The issue arises where an entity previously registered under the old regime could not select sub clause (i) on the portal during the period before a CBDT extension was issued, and therefore was provisionally registered under sub clause (vi) for three years. The statutory scheme prescribes automatic five year registration under Section 12AB(1)(a) where an application is made under sub clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac). The circumstances include an existing 12AA registration, a global transition caused by legislative amendment, extensions later issued by the Board to mitigate hardship, and technical/portal constraints that prevented selecting the correct sub clause. The administrative purpose of the Board's extensions and the remedial object of the registration provisions are relevant to determining whether the portal filing should be treated as compliant with sub clause (i).

Conclusion: The application filed on the portal under sub clause (vi) on account of portal limitations and timing in the grey period is to be treated as if filed under sub clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac), and the matter is remitted to the authority to process the Form 10A as an application under Section 12A(1)(ac)(i) and consider grant of registration under Section 12AB(1)(a) for five years from AY 2022 23, allowing the authority to call for documents and afford hearing.

Issue (ii): Validity of the ex parte rejection of the Form 10AB application for regular registration and the appropriate remedy.

Analysis: The ex parte rejection raises the question of procedural fairness. Where an application has been rejected without hearing in circumstances where the applicant is entitled to have the application considered and where prior relief (as in Issue (i)) is to be afforded, the proper course is to set aside the ex parte order and restore the matter for fresh consideration after giving the applicant an opportunity of hearing and allowing submission of documents.

Conclusion: The ex parte rejection is set aside and the application is remitted to the authority to be processed and decided afresh after affording opportunity of hearing, in light of the direction on Issue (i).

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal condones the delays in filing the appeals, directs that the portal filing made under sub clause (vi) be treated as if made under sub clause (i) for the purposes of Section 12AB(1)(a), sets aside and restores the provisional registration order and the ex parte rejection, and remits both matters to the competent authority for processing, document calls and hearings for grant of registration for five years from AY 2022 23 where appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi: Where technical or administrative portal limitations and timing during an interim 'grey period' prevent an applicant from selecting the statutory sub clause required for automatic five year registration, the filing may be treated as compliant with the intended sub clause and the authority directed to process the application accordingly, subject to calling for documents and affording opportunity of hearing; an ex parte rejection in such circumstances must be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.

---