TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1815
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter introduction of new regime for registration of Trust from 01.4.2021, assessee was granted registration under clause (ac) of Section 12(1) of the Act for the period 2022-23 to 2026-27 vide order dated 31.08.2021 and approval u/s 80G was also granted for the same period vide order dated 31.03.2021. Subsequently, assessee filed an application dated 19.09.2025 in Form 10AB for renewal of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act and as the jurisdiction over the case of M/s Lakhmi Chand Charitable Society were vested with Central Circle-28, Delhi, which is under the administrative control of the PCIT (Central)-3, Delhi, application of assessee trust in Form-10AB filed on 19.09.2025 for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act was transferred to office of the Principle Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Delhi-3 (hereinafter referred as 'Competent Authority') 3. Thereafter assessee was called upon by notice dated 26.12.2025 copy of which is available at Page No. 57-66 to submit necessary documents, evidence and submissions in support of the claim and reply of assessee was filed on 09.01.2026 copy of which is available at page no. 61-74 of the paper book. Thereafter vide the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1.4. That the PCIT (Central) erred on facts and in law in relying on earlier cancellation order dated 31.03.2024 which was based on retracted statements and various inadmissible electronic data/evidence, excel sheets, etc. which cannot constitute valid evidence, inter alia, as per provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (BhartiyaSakshyaAdhiniyam, 2023). 2. That the Ld. PCIT, has erred in law by traversing beyond the prescribed look back period of three years under Rule 17A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and relying upon materials, allegations and circumstances pertaining to FY 2014-15 to FY 2020-21, which falls outside three financial years immediately preceding the financial year in which application is filed. 2.1. The Ld. PCIT, has erred in law in travelling beyond the jurisdiction vested under Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act by relying upon past allegations, alleged specified violations, and issues forming part of the earlier cancellation proceedings, including matters/issues already adjudicated by this Hon'ble Tribunal, which are irrelevant for the purpose of grant/renewal of registration. 2.2. The Ld. PCIT has failed to record any inde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rying: out non genuine activities which demonstrates lack due care and non-application of mind on part of the Ld. PCIT and no valid Show Cause Notice can be said to have been to the Appellant Society. 5. That the Ld. PCIT, has erred in exercising jurisdiction in a proceeding under Section 12A of the Act, since the jurisdiction to take any action regarding registration under Section 12A of the Act in the present case vests exclusively with Ld. CIT(E), New Delhi. 6. That the PCIT (Central) erred on facts and in law in levelling various false and baseless allegations and drawing adverse inferences, without any corroborating evidence(s) to substantiate the same. 7. That the Ld. PCIT has passed the impugned order in violation of principle of natural justice inasmuch as several of the grounds and material relied upon the impugned order was never put to the Appellant Society, thereby denying the Appellant Society meaningful opportunity to meet the same. The Appellant Society craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing." 4. The rival contentions were heard and ld. Senior counsel appearing for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....od under Rule 17A(2)(g) of Income Tax Rules 1962, is beyond the Jurisdiction conferred by Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act.The Ld. PCIT rejected renewal applications in Form 10AB by relying upon material, allegations and circumstances pertaining to FY 2014-15 to FY 2020-21, brushing aside the three-year limitation prescribed in Rule 17A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. As per the contention so ld. Sr. Counsel, Rule 17A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 confines the documentary enquiry to not being more than three years immediately preceding the year in which the said application is made. The Applications in Form 10AB were filed on 19.09.2025. The relevant years that could be examined were therefore FY 2022-23, FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25. The Ld. PCIT travelled wholly outside the permissible window by founding the rejection exclusively based on documents of FY 2014-15 to FY 2020-21. Ld. Counsel has relied decision in Chandigarh Educational Society v. DCIT [2026] 185 taxmann.com 782 (Chd. - Trib.), to contend that this Tribunal has held that Rule 17A confines the enquiry to three years and that the PCIT had mixed up two proceedings, namely, cancellation of registration vis-à....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....laborated in impugned order were not before the competent authority at the time of grant such renewal. Then the submissions have been made on the merits of the allegations on the basis of search and investigation wing. Ld. DR has also relied decisions in Chandigarh Educational Society Vs. DCIT/ACIT (2026 185 tamxann.com 782 (Chandigarh - Trib) &Srhi Guru Ram Dass Educational Society Vs. DCIT/ACIT, Central-2 (2026) 185 taxmann.com 989 (Chandigarh Trib) the same have also been taken into consideration. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record and the foremost thing that has to be taken into consideration is that it is a case of examining the eligibility of applicant assessee within the scope of Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act. There is no doubt to proposition that scope of enquiry at the stage of grant/renewal of registration under Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act is statutorily confined to two questions only: (a) whether the activities of the trust/institution are genuine; and (b) whether it has complied with the requirements of any other law material for achieving its objects. 6.1 In Pista Devi Education Society Vs Commission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... along with all the evidences. 10. As we go through the impugned order which is indeed a long document running in 143 pages, we find that from para 6 onwards ld. Competent authority has taken up discussion of issues and throughout the discussion which subsequently runs up to page 142 there is only reproduction of findings arrived as an outcome of search and seizure proceedings u/s 142 of the Act carried out on 14.10.2020 in the case of Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, his close associates and few transacting parties with whom Shri Manoj Kumar Singh had entered into various transactions. There is absolutely no discussion of any material submissions and evidences filed by the assessee in response to the queries raised by the ld. Competent authority vide notice dated 26.12.2025. It is crystal clear from the impugned order that none of the evidences and submissions of the assessee to the queries raised have been doubted or any material deficiency noticed to allege that the activities are not genuine. But, material alien to the queries has been relied to hold that the activities of the assessee are not -genuine. 11. On the contrary, the admitted state of affairs is that assessee is running....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect the application but then recourse was taken to issue notice dated 13.03.2026 by citing specified violation which were found in impugned order dated 31.03.2024, which in fact was quashed by this Tribunal. 13. Further, taking note of provisions of the Act as coming effect from 01.04.2021, wherein the procedure for 'fresh registration' was introduced by way of Section 12AB, we find that as with regard to entities holding registration u/s 12A the newly introduced Section 12A(1)(ac)(i) required entities like assessee holding 12A registration to apply for registration within 3 months from 1st April, 2021 and such entities were then entitled for grant of registration for period of 5 years as per clause 12AB(1)(c). Thereafter, as per Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) the entities were required to seek renewal of the registration granted u/s 12AB and thereupon provisions of Section 12AB(1)(b) come into effect and vests powers with a competent authority to call for such document or information from the trust or applicant entity or independently make such inquiries as competent authority thinks necessary in order to satisfy about the genuineness of the activities of the trust or institution and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iven any adverse findings. The assessing officer mentions that after verification of the details furnished by the assessee and the material available on record for AY 2022-23, total income of assessee is assessed at Nil amount. Further the order dated 29.03.2024, specially mentions that assessment order is passed with prior approval of Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-7, New Delhi. The Assessing Officer, has not reported any specified violations or any violation of terms of registration in the Assessment Proceedings for AY 2022-23 (FY 2021-22) and does not record any adverse findings regarding genuineness of the activities of the Appellant or any violation of provisions of any material law. Further, as observed earlier, the Ld. PCIT has also not recorded any adverse findings for the relevant period. Therefore, in the absence of any adverse findings in the Assessment Proceedings for FY 2021-22 and in the impugned order for relevant period, it is erroneous to allege that activities of assessee are not genuine. 17. Here it is pertinent to note that in the show cause communication dated 13.03.2026, by which the search and investigation findings of period prior to 01.0....