TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 267
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since the appeals arise out of the same set of proceedings, involve common facts and revolve around an interconnected controversy relating to renewal of registration and approval granted to the assessee trust, they were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee trust had applied for renewal of registration under section 12AB as well as approval under section 80G of the Act. The learned CIT (Exemption), vide separate orders dated 28.03.2026, rejected both the applications primarily on the ground that the trust deed did not contain any specific clause declaring the trust to be irrevocable or providing that the trust property stood ir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bombay High Court, the learned CIT (Exemption) subsequently granted registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G to the assessee trust. However, while granting such registration and approval, the learned CIT (Exemption) recorded certain observations stating that the Revenue was contemplating challenge to the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and, therefore, by way of abundant caution, the assessee trust, donor entities and other stakeholders were being informed that the registration, approval and consequential benefits flowing therefrom would remain subject to the ultimate outcome of the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is against these observations and caveats inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....survives for adjudication. The rejection orders dated 28.03.2026, which formed the subject matter of challenge before us, have effectively lost their operative significance once the learned CIT (Exemption), pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, granted registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. The substantive relief sought by the assessee in those appeals already stands granted. No consequential prejudice now survives arising from the original rejection orders. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the rejection orders any further, we hold that ITA No.6421/Mum/2026 has become infructuous on account of subsequent events and are dismissed as such. 7. Coming to ITA No. 6429/Mum/2026, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e learned CIT (Exemption) travel beyond the scope of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. The High Court directed that applications should not be rejected solely on the ground of absence of an express irrevocability clause. The learned CIT (Exemption), while implementing those directions, was required to grant or refuse registration in accordance with law and on the basis of the facts before him. Once registration and approval were granted, the statutory recognition so conferred could not be converted into a tentative or conditional recognition by referring to a possible future challenge. Such observations do not emanate from any provision of the Act and are unsupported by any statutory mechanism permitting a registration....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The principle emerging from the said decision fully supports the assessee's grievance before us. 12. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the observations made by the learned CIT (Exemption) stating that the registration, approval and consequential tax benefits would remain subject to the outcome of proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be sustained. Such observations neither emanate from the statutory provisions governing registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G nor can they coexist with a grant made in compliance with a binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. The validity and efficacy of the registration granted to t....