MRT NO.1 CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI V. ITO, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

ITA 1934/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves MRT No. 1 Charitable Trust, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, concerning the registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Trust initially filed for provisional registration under the wrong clause, leading to a shorter registration period. Subsequently, their application for final registration was rejected as not maintainable. The Tribunal found merit in the Trust's argument that the application should be considered under the correct clause, leading to the remand of the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773466 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Kaakkum Karangal v. ITO in ITA No. 1561/Chny/2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: E.PAVUNA SUNDARI
• Assessee Lawyers: N. ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Period of limitation; Competent authority; Charitable institution; Time period of passing order
• Section: 12AA; 80G

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी रȉेश नंदन सहाय, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1933 & 1934/Chny/2025 MRT No. 1 Charitable Trust, No. 16, Krishnama Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AABTM7859A] Vs. The Commissioner Income (Exemption), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal in ITA No. 1933/Chny/2025 filed by the assessee is directed against order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the ld. PCIT/CIT, Chennai in Form No. 10AC granting provisional approval under section 80G(5)(iv) and 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The appeal in ITA No. 1934/Chny/2025 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.06.2025 by the ld. CIT(Exemption), Chennai rejecting approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 2 2. Both the appeals filed by the assessee involving common issue on an identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to hear both the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up appeal in ITA No. 1933/Chny/2024 for adjudication. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 1103 days. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay in support of an affidavit stating the following reasons: The captioned appeal was e-filed in the Registry of the Appellate Tribunal on 07.07.2025 and the said appeal was notified by the Registry that the same has been filed beyond the limitation period by 1103 days. The delay in filing the appeal before the Bench was neither willful nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond the control of the Petitioner/Appellant. The Appellant submits that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of the fact that the appellant had initially applied for provisional registration of 80G registration by wrongly filing an application under clause (iv) of section 80G(5) of the Act instead of clause (i) despite having the valid registration under the old regime leading to grant of registration under the new regime only for a period of three years i.e. (AY 2022-23 to AY 2024-25). In consequence to the above provisional registration granted by the competent authority, the appellant had applied for final registration under the new regime by selecting the dropdown under clause (iii) which application got rejected by CIT(E), Chennai vide order dated 09.06.2025 by treating such application as not maintainable / filed beyond the due date. The said rejection order is also simultaneously challenged in ITA NO. 1934/2025 along with the present appeal. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 3 The appellant being aggrieved by the recent rejection order and after noticing the mistake committed in the selection of wrong dropdown in the initial application filed in Form 10A and had resorted to file the present appeal with a prayer to treat the application filed in Form No.10A as an application filed under clause (i) for grant of final registration for assessment year 2022-23 to 2026-27. The main reason for delay in filing the appeal is on account of pursuing the procedure laid down for obtaining final registration in consequence to the provisional registration originally granted inasmuch as the grievance against the impugned order/provisional registration arises only upon the passing of the rejection order in treating the subsequent application as not maintainable. Therefore, the delay in filing the appeal is due to the complexities involved in understanding and implementing the provisions governing the transition of old regime to new regime which would constitute reasonable cause for admission of appeal for adjudication of issues on merits in the interest of justice. 5. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 6. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, the ld. AR Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate submits that the assessee had initially applied for provisional registration of 80G registration by wrongly filing an application under clause (iv) of section 80G(5) of the Act instead of clause (i) despite having the valid registration under the old regime Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 4 leading to grant of registration under the new regime only for a period of three years i.e. (AY 2022-23 to AY 2024-25). In consequence to the above provisional registration granted by the competent authority, the assessee had applied for final registration under the new regime by selecting the dropdown under clause (iii) which application got rejected by CIT(E), Chennai vide order dated 09.06.2025 by treating such application as not maintainable / filed beyond the due date. Thus, the ld. AR prayed to treat the application filed in Form No.10A as an application filed under clause (i) for grant of final registration for assessment year 2022-23 to 2026-27. 7. The ld. DR Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT fairly conceded that the matter may be remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(Exemption) for fresh consideration. 8. Having heard both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, we note that the assessee Trust incorporated in 11.12.2006, possessing valid registration under section 12AA of the Act dated 31.01.2008. After the insertion of new provisions for registration by the Finance Act, 2021, the assessee ought to have filed an application in Form 10A for approval under clause (i) of 1st proviso Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 5 under section 80G(5) of the Act on or before the extended due date of 30.06.2024 for obtaining regular registration for 5 years. We note that the assessee inadvertently filed its application on Form 10A under clause (iv) of 1st proviso under section 80G(5) of the Act on 30.03.2022 for provisional registration. After processing the application in Form 10A, the ld. PCIT/CIT granted provisional registration in Form 10AC dated 06.04.2022 under clause (iv) of 1st proviso under section 80G(5) of the Act from 06.04.2022 to AY 2024-25 (3 years). Though the assessee had approval under section 80G of the Act even prior to insertion of new provisions for registration by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021, it only obtained a provisional registration due to its mistake of filing an application under clause (iv) instead of clause (i). 9. We note that vide e-filing acknowledgement No. 663433280291024 placed at page 24 of the paper book, the assessee filed an application in Form 10AB under clause (iii) of 1st proviso to section 80G of the Act on 29.10.2024 to extend its provisional registration. While processing this application, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application vide order dated 09.06.2025. We find force in the argument of the ld. AR that the assessee is entitled to be registered for 5 years and merely for the reason that it had filed the application under Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 6 incorrect clause, the same cannot be taken away. The same ratio has been held by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kaakkum Karangal v. ITO in ITA No. 1561/Chny/2023. As per the provisions of section 80G of the Act, the assessee being an old trust, it should have been filed an application under clause (i) only. Since clause (i) applies to the assessee, it could not have filed an application under clause (iv). Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to consider the application filed on 06.04.2022 as an application filed for registration under section 80G under clause (i) of the 1st proviso and then grant registration to the assessee for 5 years, i.e., AY 2022-23 to AY 2026-27. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. No. 1934/Chny/2025 10. Since we have remanded the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to consider afresh the application of the assessee filed in Form 10A dated 30.03.2022 as an application filed for registration under section 80G under clause (i) of the 1st proviso, the appeal filed against the order of Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1933 & 1934/Chny/25 7 the ld. CIT(E) dated 09.06.2025 becomes infructuous and dismissed accordingly. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 1933/Chny/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal in ITA No. 1934/Chny/2025 is dismissed. Order pronounced on 23rd September, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 23.09.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "