D Y PATIL AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY,KOLHAPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR

ITA 2334/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University appealing against the decision of the CIT (Exemption), Pune, which denied their application for registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The denial was based on the incorrect selection of the section code in Form No.10AB, where the university inadvertently selected clause (ii) instead of clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac). The Tribunal noted that such clerical errors should not be fatal to the application process, especially when no adverse findings on the merits were made by the CIT (Exemption). The Tribunal referenced a similar case and a CBDT circular that allowed for rectification of such errors and remanded the matter back for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396382 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Kimaya Ashram Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune, Vir Sewa Mandir vs CIT (Exemption), Sri Jeyamkonda Chaleeswara Soundaranayaki Amman Kumbhabiskheka Mala Kuthu and Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust's cases
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M.M.CHATE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S. SHINGTE
• Keywords: Set aside; Charitable institution
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.2334/PUN/2024 (Assessment Year 2025-2026) D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technicl University, Wathar Warana Nagar Road, Talsande, Kolhapurs. PAN : AAAJD 1549 F vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pramod S. Shingte, CA For Revenue : Shri M.M. Chate, DR Date of Hearing : 09.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2025 ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM: The appeal file by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune (“CIT(E)”) dated 09.09.2024 denying grant of registration u/s.12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT erred in not grating registration u/sec. 12AB on the ground of incorrect clause [clause (ii) of S.12A(1)(ac) instead of clause (iii)] while filing Form 10AB, not accepting the request and submission of the appellant that the application may kindly be treated to have been filed under clause (iii) and not under clause (ii) processing the same accordingly.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 01.03.2024 for registration of the trust under sub- clause (ii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act. With a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and 2 ITA.No.2334/PUN./2024 (D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University) compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust / institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects, a notice was issued through ITBA portal on 09.05.2024 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/ clarification listed therein, seeking compliance by 23.05.2024. The appellant submitted the requisite details. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(E) issued another notice dated 13.07.2024 pointing out certain discrepancies in the submissions so filed seeking compliance by 22.07.2024 and the same reads as follows : \"On verification of records and details furnished by you, it is seen that you have not furnished the copy of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. You have filed application under clause (ii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. The provisions of said section are applicable to a trust or institution which is regularly approved under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act. As per the provisions of Rule 11AA(2)(e) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the copy of existing order granting approval was required to be submitted along with the application itself. Therefore, the copy of order of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act in form No.10AC issued under the provisions of clause (i) or clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act was required to be submitted by you along with the application, itself. You were also specifically requested vide the notice dated 21/05/2024 to furnish copy of such approval. However, it is seen that the copy of such regular approval is neither submitted along with the application nor submitted during the present proceedings till date. The copy of order of approval available on record is a provisional approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act and not a regular approval. Further, it is also seen from the records that you have not made any valid application for regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.\" 4. The assessee filed its reply on 05.08.2024. However, not convinced with the contentions put forth by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application filed by the assessee under wrong section code as non- maintainable without going into the merits of the case and drawing any adverse inference against the assessee by observing as under: “6. After verification of the submission made by the assessee it is found that the assessee vide its reply dated 05/08/2024 has admitted the fact that while filing the present application erroneously wrong section code was selected. Further, the assessee has requested to consider the present application. However, the request of the assessee to consider the present application under clause (iii) cannot be accepted since the form filed under one clause cannot be considered to be filed under another clause of section 12A(1) (ac) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3 ITA.No.2334/PUN./2024 (D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University) 7. In view of the above, the application filed by the assessee is treated as non-maintainable and hence, 'rejected' for statistical purposes without going into the merits of the case and no adverse inference is drawn against the assessee.” 5. Aggrieved by such order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and the solitary ground of appeal raised by the assessee relates thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the application of the assessee has been rejected on hyper-technical ground. The assessee has selected wrong code inadvertently while filing the application in Form No.10AB. He submitted in a recent CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 (a copy of which was placed on record), in para 4.1 it has been stated that if the application was furnished by the assessee under the wrong section code than it may furnish a fresh application in Form 10AB within the extended time provided in the said circular. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(E) may be set aside with a direction to treat decide the matter afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). 8. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on records. The main grievance of the assessee agitated in this appeal is the selection of wrong section code by the assessee in its application for regular registration other than section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. We note that similar issue came up for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of the Pune Tribunal in the case of Kimaya Ashram Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune in ITA Nos. 2033 & 2034/PUN/2024 and the Tribunal vide its order dated 19.12.2024 set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the issue afresh observing as under: 4 ITA.No.2334/PUN./2024 (D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University) “7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the two paper books furnished by the assessee. We find that the assessee trust was required to file the application for registration u/s 12A of the IT Act in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the IT Act but due to typographical error the application was filed in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the IT Act. We also find that Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune has rejected the application of the assessee on the basis of above technical error and at the same time on merit of the case no adverse inference was drawn by him against the assessee. We find that the assessee has relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vir Sewa Mandir vs CIT (Exemption) in ITA No.1556/DEL/2024 order dated 09.08.2024 wherein under identical facts and similar circumstances, the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under :- “7. We have heard both the parties carefully. It is evident that the appellant/ assessee had committed a technical mistake in preparing the application under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) instead of 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. It was also brought to the notice of the Bench that the assessee had filed revised Form 10AB for seeking registration under the correct provisions i.e. Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act which could have been considered by the learned CIT(Exemption). 8. In the light of the latest decisions in Sri Jeyamkonda Chaleeswara Soundaranayakai Amman Kumbhabiskheka Mala Kuthu and Raj Krishan Jain Charitable Trust's cases (supra), the typographical error deserves to be corrected. Therefore, it would be appropriate and reasonable if the appeal is remanded back to the file of the learned CIT(Exemption) for fresh adjudication by considering amended application of the appellant under the repaired provisions 9. Hence, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.” 8. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal in the case of Vir Sewa Mandir (supra), we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee and accordingly deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the issue afresh after treating the original application as filed by the assessee under correct/desired section i.e. section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the IT Act. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in this regard and produce specific documents/evidences desired by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in support of application for registration u/s 12A of the IT Act without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this appeal are partly allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.2033//PUN/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes.” 9. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate bench (supra) and in the light of the Circular No. 7/2024 which has been issued by the CBDT on 25.04.2024 after the application for registration was filed by the assessee on 01.03.2024 wherein the issue of mentioning the wrong section code has been addressed as a common and frequent error and 5 ITA.No.2334/PUN./2024 (D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University) also considering the given facts and circumstances in the instant case and that the Ld. CIT(E) has not given any adverse findings on merits of the case, we deem it fit and proper, in the interest of justice, to grant an opportunity to the assessee by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E). In our humble view, wrong selection of section code/clause would not disentitle the assessee to its rightful claim and cannot be treated as fatal to the proceedings initiated after the filing of the application Hence, the Ld. CIT(E) ought to have given an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the defect. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) who shall give an opportunity to the assessee to file the correct application and then decide the case on merits denovo as per facts and law after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant in respect of the notice(s) of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(E) and submit the details/ documents as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E) on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The solitary ground raised by the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 27.05.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [RAMA KANTA PANDA] [ASTHA CHANDRA] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 27th May, 2025 vr/- 6 ITA.No.2334/PUN./2024 (D.Y. Patil Agriculture & Technical University) Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Pune concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. By Order //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. "