Rent Increase Paid to Specified Persons Cannot, on Mere Assumption, Justify Denial of Section 12AB Registration: Jaipur ITAT Directs Grant of Registration


By CA Vijayakumar Shetty

Executive Summary

The Jaipur ITAT directed the CIT(E) to grant registration to Jamna Devi Shikshan Sansthan, holding that an increase in rent paid to specified persons could not, by itself, establish that an undue benefit had been conferred under Section 13(1)(c).

The society was running a co-educational English-medium senior secondary school in rented premises. The monthly rent was increased from ₹70,000 in FY 2022–23 to ₹1,00,000 in FY 2023–24. The CIT(E) treated the enhanced rent as a benefit to persons specified under Section 13(3) and rejected the Form 10AB application.

The Tribunal noted that the earlier rent covered only the basement and ground floor. Subsequently, the first and second floors were constructed and an amended lease deed was executed. The society had furnished the lease deeds, resolutions approving the rent increase, rent ledgers, TDS details and particulars of the additional area.

The CIT(E) had neither properly examined these documents nor disputed the society’s educational objects and activities. Therefore, without examining the additional construction and prevailing rental value, it could not merely be presumed that excessive rent had been paid to benefit specified persons.

The Tribunal accordingly held that Section 13(1)(c) cannot be invoked on assumptions to deny registration when the charitable objects and activities are undisputed. It set aside the CIT(E)’s order and directed that registration be granted.

The Jaipur ITAT directed the CIT(E) to grant registration to Jamna Devi Shikshan Sansthan, holding that an increase in rent paid to specified persons could not, by itself, establish that an undue benefit had been conferred under Section 13(1)(c).

The society was running a co-educational English-medium senior secondary school in rented premises. The monthly rent was increased from ₹70,000 in FY 2022–23 to ₹1,00,000 in FY 2023–24. The CIT(E) treated the enhanced rent as a benefit to persons specified under Section 13(3) and rejected the Form 10AB application.

The Tribunal noted that the earlier rent covered only the basement and ground floor. Subsequently, the first and second floors were constructed and an amended lease deed was executed. The society had furnished the lease deeds, resolutions approving the rent increase, rent ledgers, TDS details and particulars of the additional area.

The CIT(E) had neither properly examined these documents nor disputed the society’s educational objects and activities. Therefore, without examining the additional construction and prevailing rental value, it could not merely be presumed that excessive rent had been paid to benefit specified persons.

The Tribunal accordingly held that Section 13(1)(c) cannot be invoked on assumptions to deny registration when the charitable objects and activities are undisputed. It set aside the CIT(E)’s order and directed that registration be granted.

About the Author: Details are awaited

Pdf file of article: Not Available

Posted on: August 29th, 2026


Disclaimer: This article is only for general information and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers desiring legal advice should consult with an experienced professional to understand the current law and how it may apply to the facts of their case. Neither the author nor itatonline.org and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. No part of this document should be distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without express written permission of itatonline.org

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*