PRANAB KANYA SANGHA,NORTH TWNETY FOUR PARGANAS V. CIT (EXEMPTION), , KOLKATA

ITA 704/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Pranab Kanya Sangha, a charitable trust, appealing against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata, which rejected their application for final approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act due to a procedural delay of three days in filing Form 10AB. The trust had previously received provisional approval under section 80G(5)(iv). The Tribunal considered the trust's objectives of providing relief, education, and medical aid to the underprivileged and noted the procedural nature of the application, referencing similar cases where delays were condoned. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the importance of substantive justice over procedural technicalities.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778098 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Charitable institution
• Section: 12A; 80G

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 Pranab Kanya Sangha………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Barasat-I, Hridaypur, West Bengal-700127.. [PAN: AAATP4743M] vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Ashok Mukherjee, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 17, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 07, 2025 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.08.2024 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’] rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for final approval as per the provisions of section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee has been granted provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act in Form 10AC by CPC, Bangalore on 01.10.2021 for a period from A.Y 2022-23 to 2024-25. Subsequently, application for approval of the trust u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act was filed on 02.09.2024 by the assessee in Form 10AB. Notice was issued on 08.02.2025 to the assessee with a request for furnishing details of activities carried out as well as certain documents. In response to the notice, the assessee furnished certain Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 2 details. The ld. CIT(E) examined the details submitted by the assessee and rejected the application by helding that the activity of the assessee has already commenced and present application filed in Form 10AB for final approval was beyond the prescribed limit of the CBDT Circular and the CIT has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form 10AB. 3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld. AR challenges the very impugned order of the ld. CIT(E) thereby submitting that there was only a delay of 3 days in filing the application for approval and it was on account of reasonable cause. The ld. AR submits that the object of the assessee is to give relief to the poor, provide education and medical relief of backward section of the society. The ld. AR has cited so many decisions of the Tribunal and submits that the delay should be condoned and the ld. CIT(E) be directed to pass a fresh order after considering the application filed in Form 10AB as per law. 5. The ld. DR supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection for remitting the appeal of the assessee before the ld. CIT(E). 6. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, we have gone through impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(E) and find that the ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application only on the ground that the Form 10AB had not been filed within the prescribed limit. The factual position of the assessee as stated by the assessee for delay of 3 days is as follows: Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 3 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 4 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 5 6.1 Going over the facts of the case, we find that the assessee has filed fresh/revised application in Form 10AB for approval u/s 80G(5) on being asked from the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax and it had been filed on 02.09.2024. There was a delay of only 3 days since the letter of issued from the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax and the delay has properly been explained by the assessee in the aforesaid letter. Moreover, after going through the several decisions of the Tribunal, we Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 6 find that the filing of Form AB is a procedural in nature and not mandatory. We find reliance on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal passed in ITA No.1476/Kol/2025 in the case of Shri Sanatan Dharma Panchayat High School Mandawa vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata decided on 12.09.2025, wherein it has been held as under: “5. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, the following facts have been emerged: (a) the assessee has filed an applied for approval u/s 12A for registration on 31.01.2023 and provisional registration has been granted on 28.02.2023. (b) the assessee has filed application for regular approval u/s 12A in Form NO.10AB and the approval had been granted. (c) the assessee has filed an application for approval of registration u/s 80G on 02.03.2023 and the provisional approval has been granted on 09.03.2023 (d) the assessee has filed application for regular approval u/s 80G on 05.12.2024 in Form No.10AB with condonation of delay and reasons for such delay are identical as filed u/s 12A but the same has been rejected by the ld. CIT(E). 5.1 Having gone through the judgment cited by the ld. AR, we find that in the aforesaid judgment, the Hon’ble High Court of Madras has allowed a writ petition by holding as under: “Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Donation to certain funds, charitable institutions, etc. (Approval under sub- section (5)) - CBDT, vide Circular No. 8 of 2022 dated 31-3-2022, extended time limit with respect to both existing trusts and new trusts for registrations under sections 10(23C), 12A and 80G(5) - However, CBDT, while extending time limit further vide impugned Clause 5 (ii) of Circular No. 6 of 2023, dated 24-5-2023, did not grant extension to new trusts for filing forms for application of registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) - However, revenue could not provide any rationale for such a classification - Even though new trusts as well as existing trusts had no right to demand for extension of time as a matter of right, when revenue had thought it fit to extend time, considering hardship, there was no material placed before Court, nor any reasoning as contained in impugned order that new trusts did not face hardship in respect of filing of application under section 80G(5) alone- Further, leaving out clause in respect of section 80G(5) alone, that too only in respect of new trusts did not in any manner relate to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 7 object sought to be achieved by impugned circular nor did it provide any basis for discrimination/classification - Differential treatment was not based on any substantial distinction that was real and pertinent to object of circular - Whether therefore, impugned clause 5(ii) of circular No. 6/2023, dated 24-5-2023 was arbitrary and violative of article 14 of Constitution of India and accordingly, would be ultra vires Constitution - Held, yes [Paras 6.7 and 7] [In favour of assessee]” 5.2 Keeping in view the above facts and considering the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee before the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to consider the application submitted by the petitioner for registration u/s 80G as within time as the petitioner has already filed condonation petition in granting application u/s 12A and reasons for the delay were identical. The ld. CIT(E) will consider the application for condonation in granting registration u/s 80G and pass order on merits.” 6.2 We note that the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and based on the assessee’s facts and undue hardship created by the clause (iii) of 3rd proviso of section 80(5) of the Act and considering the various judicial pronouncements and also the condonation petition filed by the assessee, we condone the delay in filing the Form No.10AB for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act and direct the ld. CIT(E) to consider the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB for final approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) is as within prescribed time. The ld. CIT(E) will consider the application filed for grating approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act and pass order on merits. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 7th October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 07.09.2025. RS Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.704/Kol/2025 Pranab Kanya Sangha 8 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "