TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1183
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion for condonation of delay along with an affidavit of one of its trustees, Shri Bhaktiswaroop Dharmaprasad, explaining the reasons for the delay. It has been submitted therein that the order of the Ld. CIT(E) dated 14.08.2024 was communicated to the registered email ID of the trust, namely [email protected], which belonged to one of the trustees, Shri Rajendra Rabari. Since Shri Rabari had resigned from the Trust with effect from 05.12.2023, he did not inform the Trust about the passing of the impugned order. The other general-purpose email ID of the Trust, [email protected], being accessed by multiple staff members, inadvertently missed the said communication. 4. It was further explained that the Trust came to know about the rejection order only on 22.02.2025, while reviewing its tax demand status, and thereafter immediately took steps to file the present appeal on 27.02.2025. Thus, the delay, according to the assessee, was neither deliberate nor attributable to negligence but was caused due to bona fide circumstances beyond its control. It has been pleaded that the assessee has a meritorious case on merits, and unless the delay is condoned, it would suffer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me-tax Returns (ITRs) of the assessee for different years and recorded that: - For A.Y. 2019-20, the assessee filed ITR-7 and claimed exemption under section 11 to the tune of Rs. 2,53,92,278. - For A.Y. 2020-21, the assessee filed ITR-7 and claimed exemption under section 11 to the tune of Rs. 1,99,48,893. - For A.Y. 2023-24, the assessee filed ITR-7 and claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(via) amounting to Rs. 2,26,63,350. 10. From the above, the Ld. CIT(E) held that the assessee had already claimed exemption/exclusion of income under section 11 and section 10(23C) in earlier years. Consequently, it was observed that the assessee's case did not fall within the ambit of section 80G(5)(iv)(B). 11. The Ld. CIT(E) reasoned that the legislative intent behind section 80G(5)(iv)(B) is to cover only those institutions where activities have either not commenced or, if commenced, no exemption under section 11 or section 10(23C) had been claimed prior to the application. Since the assessee trust had already availed such exemptions in earlier years, the application under Form 10AB was held to be non-maintainable. 12. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the assessee's applicatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecting the application merely on the ground that the assessee had already claimed exemption under section 11 and section 10(23C) in prior years. It was argued that such a restrictive interpretation would render clause (iv)(B) redundant, because any trust which had commenced activities and claimed exemption in earlier years would forever be debarred from obtaining 80G approval, which was never the intention of the Legislature. In support of this proposition, reliance was placed on CBDT Circular No. 1/2024 dated 23.01.2024, which explained the legislative intent of the Finance Act, 2023 amendments. The AR referred in particular to para 15.5.3(f) of the circular, which clarified that trusts and institutions under the 80G regime, which had already commenced their activities, shall make an application for regular approval under sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) without being disqualified on account of having claimed exemption under section 11 or section 10(23C) in the past. The AR also drew attention to the Memorandum to the Finance Bill, 2024, which further clarified this position by dropping the restrictive condition of "not having claimed exemption" with effect from 01.10.2024. 16. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocuments to demonstrate compliance with statutory requirements. 21. The Ld. CIT(E), however, rejected the application relying strictly on the wording of section 80G(5)(iv)(B), holding that since the assessee had already claimed exemption under section 11/10(23C), the application was outside the scope of maintainability. In our considered view, this approach is unduly restrictive and does not give effect to the true intent of the legislation. 22. The Finance Act, 2023 substituted clause (iv) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) with effect from 01.10.2023, and CBDT Circular No. 1/2024 dated 23.01.2024 has clarified that institutions which have already commenced activities shall make an application for regular approval under sub-clause (B) of clause (iv). Importantly, para 15.5.3(f) of the Circular makes it explicit that such institutions are to be examined on merits for grant of approval and that the fact of having claimed exemption in earlier years cannot by itself operate as a bar. Further, the Memorandum explaining the provisions of the Finance Bill, 2024 also confirms that the restrictive condition of "not having claimed exemption" has been dropped with effect from 01.10.202....