SNEH FOUNDATION,RAJKOT V. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 297/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sneh Foundation, a trust, which appealed against the decision of the CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad, rejecting their application for approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The initial rejection was based on a typographical error where the trust mistakenly cited Section 80G(5)(ii) instead of the correct Section 80G(5)(iii) in their application form. The Tribunal noted that this was a clerical mistake and referred to a similar case (ITA No.1107/Ahd/2023) where a rectified application was accepted. The Tribunal directed the assessee to file a new application correctly citing Section 80G(5)(iii) and instructed the CIT(Exemption) to consider the application on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 27242 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.1107/Ahd/2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY PUNGLIA
• Assessee Lawyers: KALPESH DOSHI
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

" Page | 1 ITA No. 297/RJT/2024 Sneh Foundation vs. CIT(E) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.297/RJT/2024 (Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: (NA) (Hybrid Hearing) Sneh Foundation 204, Gunjan Point, Nr. Limbu Vadi Road, Opp. Field Marsh Hostel, Kalaad Road, Gujarat 360001 Vs. CIT(Exemption) Ahmedabad èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AARTS6272R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, AR Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT.DR Date of Hearing : 08/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [in short ‘Ld. CIT(E)’], dated 12.03.2024, wherein the CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee, filed in Form No.10AB, under Section 80G(5) (iii) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The grievances raised by the assessee are as follows: Page | 2 ITA No. 297/RJT/2024 Sneh Foundation vs. CIT(E) “1. That, the learned CIT(Exemption) has wrongly rejected the application filed in form No. 10AB for granting approval u/s 80G(5) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That the findings of the learned CIT(Exemption) are not justified in law as well as facts of the case and required to be deleted. 3. The appellant craves to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The facts of the case which can be stated quite shortly are as follows: The assessee before us is a trust and has filed an application for approval under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, in Form No. 10AB electronically, and as per data available, the same was filed in ITBA on 27/09/2023. This application was found to be prima- facie non-maintainable by Learned CIT (Exemption) and accordingly vide letter dated 02/11/2023, certain clarifications were sought from the assessee. In response, the assessee has filed its reply before ld. CIT(E), on 20/11/2023. On perusal of the details available on record, it was found by ld CIT(E ) that the assessee has been granted provisional approval 09-07-2021, under Clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G, vide order for the period from AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the application u/s 80G(5)(iii) in lieu of 80G(5)(ii) of the Act. In view of the above, the application filed on 27/09/2023, in Form No. 10AB, u/s. 80G(5) of the Act, was treated, by ld CIT(E ), as non- maintainable and therefore, ld. CIT(E ) rejected the assessee`s application. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Learned Counsel for the assessee, pleaded that Ld. CIT(E ) has rejected the application of the assessee, stating that Page | 3 ITA No. 297/RJT/2024 Sneh Foundation vs. CIT(E) assessee had filed application under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, in Form No. 10AB. In fact, the application should have been filed by the assessee, under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, in Form No. 10AB. The ld. Counsel submitted that this was a typographical error on the part of the assessee, in mentioning clause (ii), instead of clause (iii). Because of this typographical error, the ld. CIT (Exemption) should not have rejected the assessee`s application, rather, the application should be corrected by the ld CIT(E ) with the consent of the assessee. 6. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue, relied on the findings of the Ld. CIT(E). 7. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. For the sake of clarity and also being pertinent, we reproduce solitary reason to reject the assessee`s application that assessee had filed application under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, instead under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. This is clearly a typographical error in preparing the application on the part of the assessee-trust. We note that the said issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in ITA No.1107/Ahd/2023, order dated 5th April, 2024, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench held as follows: “7. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. It is undisputed fact that the assessee was granted Provisional Registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act by Ld. CIT(E) on 24.09.2021 for a period of three years upto the Asst. Year 2024-25. The only reason for rejecting Permanent Registration u/s. 80G(5) of the Act, the assessee wrongly filed the Page | 4 ITA No. 297/RJT/2024 Sneh Foundation vs. CIT(E) application under 80G(5)(ii) instead of u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. It is undisputed fact that the assessee Trust is carrying out the charitable activities and granted registration u/s. 12AB of the Act on 06.10.2021 and also Provisional Registration u/s. 80G of the Act on 24.09.2021. Thus the genuineness of the activities carried out by the Trust is not doubted by the Ld. CIT(E), denial of Permanent Registration only the count of wrong mentioning of sub clause 80G(5) will certainly affects the charitable activities carried out by the Trust. In similar circumstances, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Kolkata Tribunal has set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) and to pass order on merits, irrespective of the delay occurred in filing the fresh application for final approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act. 6.1. Respectfully following the same, the present impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(E) is hereby set aside with a direction to Ld. CIT(E) to pass order on merits on the rectified application to be filed by the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee should file the application for Permanent Registration under clause (iii) of first proviso to Section 80G of the Act before Ld. CIT(E). 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.” 8. Therefore, we note that ld CIT(E ) rejected, assessee`s application stating that the assessee did not file the application u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act and stated that the assessee has filed the application u/s.80G(5)(ii) of the Act, so, it is non- maintainable. We find that this is a typographical error and the Ld. Counsel for the assessee also took us through paper book page no.13, wherein Form No.10AB is placed and stated that there was a typographical error in mentioning the Clause (ii). The correct Section would be 80G(5)(iii) instead of 80G(5)(ii) of the Act and this happened because of typographical error. In these circumstances, we direct the assessee to file a fresh application in Form No. 10AB, u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act, before the ld. CIT(Exemption). We also direct the Ld. CIT(E) to pass the order, on merit, on the rectified application, (to be filed by the assessee), in accordance with law. For statistical purposes, the assessee`s appeal is treated to be allowed. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Page | 5 ITA No. 297/RJT/2024 Sneh Foundation vs. CIT(E) Order is pronounced in the open court on 06/01/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rajkot Ǒदनांक/ Date: 06/01/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot 1. Draft dictated on (dictation sheet is enclosed with main file.) 08.10.2024 2. Draft placed before author 09.10.2024 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. After Pronouncement fair order comes to the Sr.PS/PS on 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk 9. Date on which file goes to the AR 10. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. 12. Draft dictation sheets are attached "