BUDDHADEV EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,THANE V. EXEMPTION WARD, THANE, THANE

ITA 5889/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust appealing against the decision of the CIT(Exemption), Pune, which rejected their application for final registration under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The rejection was primarily based on a technical error where the trust mistakenly applied under clause (vi) instead of clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac). The Tribunal found that the CIT(Exemption) had not adequately considered the substantive eligibility of the trust for registration and had incorrectly concluded that the trust failed to submit necessary documents. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fair consideration of the trust's application, taking into account the correct clause and all submitted documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789319 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Rotary Charity Trust vs. CIT(E) 6 170 taxmann.com 797/ [2025] 211 ITD 297
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AGNES THOMAS
• Assessee Lawyers: PIYUSH BAFNA; VIRTUALLY APPEARED
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Charitable institution
• Section: 12AA; 12A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5889/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust A/8 Buddhadev Nagar Sarovar Malyan, Dahanu Road, Thane 401601 PAN: (AABTB8363Q) vs Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward, Thane Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Thane West, Thane 400602 Appellant Respondent Present for: Appellant by : Shri Piyush Bafna, CA (Virtually appeared) Respondent by : Ms. Agnes Thomas, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 20.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.11.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of CIT(Exemption), Pune vide DIN & Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025- 26/1079838444(1) dated 21.08.2025 passed u/s. 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 21.08.2025. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: “Erroneous Rejection of Application: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on facts Hon'ble CIT Exemption Pune has erred in rejecting the application of the appellant trust for final Printed from counselvise.com 2 I.T.A. No.5889/Mum/2025 AY: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust registration u/s 12A of the Act without properly appreciating the facts and submissions made by the Appellant and hence, the impugned order may please be quashed and the registration under section 12A of the Act may kindly be restored. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to other grounds Ld. CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application for registration on the incorrect and fallacious observation that the Appellant did not furnish the copy of regular registration u/s 12AB wherein in fact it was submitted by the Appellant and thus, since the very basis for rejection of 12A is incorrect, the impugned order may be quashed and the registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act may kindly be restored. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, and without prejudice to the other grounds and assuming but without admitting, the Ld. CIT (Exemption) erred in rejecting the application for registration filed under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- 3.1. purely on a technical ground of incorrect clause selection-i.e., clause (vi) instead of clause (i)-without appreciating the substantive eligibility of the appellant for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i), considering its prior registration under section 12AA since 2010. 3.2. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) failed to consider that the incorrect selection was an inadvertent clerical error and that the appellant had sufficiently clarified and rectified the same during the proceedings. The Appellant had specifically submitted vide submissions dated 15-05-2025 and 23-07-2025 that it had inadvertently opted for clause (vi) instead of clause (i) in the initial Form 10A filed on 28-05-2021 and had provided all supporting evidence, including the original registration certificate under section 12AA, in response to the show cause notices dated 28-04-2025 and 17-07-2025. 3.3. The rejection of the application on such hyper-technical grounds, without considering the submission advanced and without fining any defect in the genuineness of the activities carried out by the Appellant as well as the merits of the case and without curing the technical error, is unjustified. The appellant relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in Rotary Charity Trust vs. CIT(E) – 170 taxmann.com 797/ [2025] 211 ITD 297 (dated 09-01-2025). 3.4. Ld. CIT(E) may please be directed to consider the application made under 12A(1)(ac)(vi) as made correctly u/s 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act and grant the regular registration. 3.5. The impugned rejection order dated 21-08-2025 may please be quashed and the registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) may kindly be granted in the interest of justice. Non-Consideration of Genuineness of Activities: Printed from counselvise.com 3 I.T.A. No.5889/Mum/2025 AY: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT-Exemption, Pune has erred in not appreciating that the appellant is genuinely engaged in charitable activities and is operating in accordance with its stated objects and applicable law, thereby fulfilling the eligibility criteria for registration under section 12A and further, Ld. CIT-Exemption has not pointed out any other defect much less doubted the genuineness of the activities carried out by the Appellant in his Show cause notice dated 17-07-2025 and hence, Ld. CIT(E) should be granted the registration under section 12A of the Act and thus the impugned order may be quashed and the registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act may kindly be restored. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT-Exemption, Pune has erred in rejecting the application for registration under section 12A of the Act on the sole ground of incorrect selection of clause u/s 12A(1)(ac) while applying for registration under Form 10AB without pointing out any specific instance of non- genuine activity or any violation of the objects of the Appellant trust, and therefore, the rejection is unjustified, and the registration ought to have been granted and thus the impugned order may be quashed and the registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act may kindly be restored. Other Ground: 6. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, vary, or withdraw all or any of grounds of appeal, in the interest of justice, if necessary, at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. The sole issue involved in the present appeal is in respect of rejecting the application of the assessee trust for final registration u/s.12A, purely on a technical ground of incorrect clause selection of the applicable Section 12A, whereby it is alleged that assessee has selected clause (vi) instead of clause (i) which according to the assessee is without appreciating the substantive eligibility of the assessee for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(i) considering its prior registration u/s.12AA since year 2010. 4. Brief facts of the case are that assessee had filed application in Form No.10AB. Assessee was registered u/s.12AA with effect from 19.12.2010. While adhering to compliances under the new registration procedures u/s.12AB, assessee applied for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi) in Form Printed from counselvise.com 4 I.T.A. No.5889/Mum/2025 AY: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust No.10A submitted on 28.05.2021 which was registered on 31.05.2021. This application was filed erroneously citing incorrect provision as clause (vi) instead of clause (i). The applicable section for the assessee is 12A(1)(ac)(i) as it was previously registered u/s.12AA before 01.04.2021. Because assessee had erroneously made the application under a wrong clause, it was issued provisional registration valid from AY 2022-23 to AY 2024-25 instead of granting final registration directly, owing to the fact that it had been registered u/s.12AA with effect from 19.11.2010. Since the previous registration was getting expired, assessee moved an application on 15.03.2025 for obtaining the final registration by mentioning about the clerical error which had occurred in selection of incorrect clause while applying u/s.12AB. 5. Assessee thus, requested for the registration process to be completed and final registration be granted to it, ignoring the incorrect selection of clause while applying for the registration. We note that ld. CIT(E) after considering the submissions of the assessee had called for copy of initial registration granted u/s.12AA with effect from 19.11.2010 which according to him, assessee fail to furnish the same. He thus, concluded in paragraph 9 that non-submission of copy of order of initial registration u/s.12AB establishes the fact that the prerequisite for application under clause (i) of the Act is not fulfilled and, therefore, the application made by the assessee is not maintainable. Thus, he rejected the application without going into the merit of the case by treating it as not maintainable. 6. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the above narrated facts. He referred to page 34 of the paper book to point out the original registration granted to the assessee with effect from 19.11.2010 having Printed from counselvise.com 5 I.T.A. No.5889/Mum/2025 AY: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust registration no as P-697 u/s.12AA. He also referred to the E-proceedings response acknowledgment dated 15.05.2025 for submissions made before the ld. CIT(E) and categorical pointed out Serial No. 3 which depicts the attachment name as “ANNEX-1-Previous-12A Registration. Pdf”. Assessee also furnished all the other relevant documentary evidences through this submission containing total 10 attachment including this one. It was thus, contended that ld. CIT(A) is grossly incorrect in observing that assessee had not submitted the original registration certificate to demonstrate that clause (i) of Section 12A(1)(ac) applies to it. This, factual position when confronted to ld. CIT could not be controverted. Thus, taking into consideration the undisputed factual position, in the interest of justice and fair play, we find it appropriate to set aside the order of ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(E) for de-novo meritorious consideration of the application filed by the assessee taking into account, the correct clause applicable to it i.e. clause (i) for considering grant of final registration to the assessee. Since assessee has already demonstrated before us that all the required documents were filed and placed on record which forms part of the paper book before us, containing the 470 pages, we also direct the ld. CIT(E) to consider the same, while processing the application made by the assessee for the purpose of granting final registration. Needless to say that, assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard and make any further submission, if so required. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee in this respect are allowed for the statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 6 I.T.A. No.5889/Mum/2025 AY: 2025-26 Buddhadev Educational Charitable Trust 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Amit Shukla] [Girish Agrawal] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 27.11.2025. Divya Ramesh Nandgaonkar Stenographer Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4. 5. Guard File CIT BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "