SHRI VARDHAMAN STHANAKWASI JAIN SHRAWAK SANGH,PUNE V. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

ITA 1912/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Vardhaman Sthanakwasi Jain Shrawak Sangh, a trust, which appealed against the decision of the CIT, Exemption, Pune, rejecting their application for registration under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The rejection was based on the technical ground that the application was filed under the wrong clause. The Tribunal found that the CIT had not considered the merits of the case and that the error in citing the clause was a curable defect. The Tribunal referenced a similar case, Nitdaa Foundation vs. CIT, to support their decision to set aside the CIT's order and remand the matter for reconsideration under the correct clause.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 776522 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2025
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Nitdaa Foundation vs. CIT, 167 taxmann.com 111 (Kolkata \\u2013 Trib.)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT BOBDE
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1912/PUN/2025 Shri Vardhaman Sthanakwasi Jain Shrawak Sangh, 1 Guru Ganesh Bhavan, Paavan Tapodham, Near Shivaji Statue, Jalna- 431203. PAN : AAHTS5220K Vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.05.2025 passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune rejecting the application for registration u/s 80G(5) of the IT Act. 2. There is delay of 8 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the affidavit for condonation that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 16.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 18.09.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1912/PUN/2025 2 we condone the delay of 8 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a trust filed its application for registration in Form No.10AB under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act on 21.11.2024. With a view to verify the genuineness of activities of the assessee and fulfilment of conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) of the IT Act, a notice was issued through ITBA portal on 28.02.2025 requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification on or before 07.03.2025. The assessee in response to above notice furnished desired information on 24.03.2025 as mentioned in the notice. Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune observed that the application for approval u/s 80G(5) was filed under clause (ii) which is not applicable to the assessee. Not being satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee in response to above notice, Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune was of the opinion that the condition (i) of section 80G(5) of the IT Act is not fulfilled & accordingly the application filed by the assessee was rejected by observing as under :- “7. The present application is filed by the assessee under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provisions of clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1912/PUN/2025 3 section 80G are related to application for renewal of regular approval of a trust or institution which is already having regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act and the period of said registration is about to expire. 8. The assessee was specifically requested vide the initial notice to furnish the copy of order of regular approval under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Such copy is actually required to be furnished along with the application itself under the provisions of Rule 11AA(2)(e) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The assessee in its reply stated that it had mistakenly selected \"Sub-Clause (ii) of Clause (5) of Section 80G\" instead of selecting \"sub-clause (iii) of Clause (5) of Section 80G.\" Further, the assessee has requested to consider the present application under sub-clause (iii) of clause (5) of Section 80G. However, the request of the assessee to consider the present application under sub-clause (iii) cannot be accepted since the form filed under one clause cannot be considered to be filed under another clause of section 80G(5) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 9. 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.” 4. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. When the appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment was filed despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits of the case after hearing Ld. DR. 6. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the application for registration u/s 80G(5) was rejected on technical ground of applying under Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1912/PUN/2025 4 wrong section code. In this regard, we find that the application was rejected on the ground of selecting wrong section code. We also find that on merits nothing adverse was found by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune. We also find that under identical facts a coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Nitdaa Foundation vs. CIT, 167 taxmann.com 111 (Kolkata – Trib.) has already allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under :- “12. Thus, the whole controversy arose due to incorrect mention of the clause under which the application was required to be filed, which was mentioned as clause (iv) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G in column 6 of Form No. 10AC whereas the same should have been mentioned as clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G and the Ld. AR also admitted this fact in the course of the hearing. Since, Form No. 10AC was filed in time, the error on the part of the assessee for mentioning the wrong clause is deemed to be a curable defect and the application on Form No. 10AC is deemed to be filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G. The order of the Ld. CIT(Exemption) is hereby set aside and he is required to consider the application as filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act and consider the same for grant of approval under section 80G(5) to the trust in accordance with law within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall file all necessary evidence before him.” 7. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal (supra), we deem it fit to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune and remand the matter back to him with a direction to treat the application of the assessee as filed under required/desired clause of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G and consider the same for grant of approval u/s 80G(5) of the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1912/PUN/2025 5 IT Act in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to comply with the notices issued by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Pune in this regard and produce requisite information/documents/ evidences in support of application for approval u/s 80G of the IT Act, 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. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 18th September, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Exemption, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "