Assessee, a charitable trust engaged in education and sports promotion, held registration under section 12A and had been granted provisional approval under section 80G valid up to Assessment Year 2024-25. It filed Form 10AB seeking regularisation of provisional approval, but in the first application, it mistakenly mentioned clause (ii) instead of clause (iii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5). CIT(E) rejected the first application as non-maintainable on that ground. Assessee then filed a fresh application under the correct clause, which CIT(E) rejected as not filed within the prescribed time, and not examined on merits. On appeal, the Tribunal held that mere mention of the wrong section could not be a ground for rejecting registration under section 80G unless the assessee was otherwise not eligible. The Tribunal further held that the\u00a0 CIT(E) ought to have allowed the assessee to rectify the mistake i.e. mentioning of the appropriate clause, or even could have suo motu passed an order treating said application under the relevant clause in section 80G(5). Tribunal also held that having an object clause in the trust deed which enables potential application of funds outside India was not a condition under section 80G(5), and therefore, the same could not be a reason for denial of registration under section 80G if assessee was otherwise eligible. Accordingly, the matter was remitted back to CIT(E) to consider the application for registration under section 80G on merits by calling for relevant details and to consider the same in accordance with the law. (AY. 2026-27)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 80G: Donation-Wrong clause-Rejection solely on this basis was improper since an opportunity to rectify, or suo motu consideration under the correct clause, should have been provided. The presence of an object enabling application of funds outside India does not bar 80G registration if eligibility otherwise exists.[S. 12A, 80G(5), Form No 10AB] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-61433","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fYR","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61433","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61433"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61433\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61434,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61433\/revisions\/61434"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61433"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61433"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61433"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}