2025 (6) TMI 1928

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....12AB(1)(b)(ii) and under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"], respectively. Common Facts and Background 3. The assessee is a public charitable trust registered with the office of the Charity Commissioner, Gujarat, with effect from 04.12.2018. The trust is engaged in charitable activities in accordance with the objects set out in its trust deed. The assessee was granted provisional registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) and provisional approval under section 80G(5)(iv) vide Form 10AC dated 07.04.2022, effective from A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2024-25. In compliance with the procedure for renewal, the assessee initially filed online applications in Form 10AB dated 21.03.2024, under section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion for registration u/s 80G(5) under clause (iii) of its first proviso by considering it as non-maintainable. 5. During the course of hearing, the Authorised Representative (AR) reiterated that the earlier applications were mistakenly filed under incorrect sub-clauses and the fresh applications were made under the correct clauses. It was further submitted that the CIT(Exemption) has misread the nature of the second application and erroneously treated it as appeal against the earlier rejected one. It was submitted that the CIT(E) ought to have examined the application on merits and granted registration if the conditions were satisfied, rather than rejecting it on technical grounds. 6. The learned Departmental Representative (DR), on b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ons. 9. The approach adopted by the CIT(Exemption) in treating the said applications as non-maintainable on the basis that the earlier applications were rejected, is not tenable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The assessee had not filed a revision or appeal against the earlier orders. Instead, the second applications were made suo motu under the correct provisions within the prescribed extended window allowed for filing as specified in the CBDT Circular No. 07/2024 dated 25.04.2024. In such a situation, it was incumbent upon the CIT(Exemption) to treat the applications as fresh and standalone, and to examine the same on merits in accordance with law. The principle of fairness and natural justice required the authority....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....correct provisions, within the extended compliance period notified by CBDT. These subsequent applications were filed to rectify a procedural defect and were not in the nature of repetitive or infructuous filings. The CIT(Exemption), in our considered view, ought to have appreciated the rectificatory nature of the second set of applications and decided on merits. 11. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad in both appeals are hereby set aside, and the matters are restored to his file with following directions: i. The CIT(Exemption) shall treat the assessee's applications dated 03.06.2024 in Form No. 10AB under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and section 80G(5)(iii) as valid, curative, and maintainable, an....