AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:
The appeals are arising out of separate orders dated 23.03.2026 rejecting applications u/s 12AB and 80G by Ld. CIT(E) u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii).
Brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed application dated 29.09.2025 in Form 10AB for registration u/s 12AB and 80G. The applicant was issued notices dated 28.12.2025 and 05.03.2026 with the request of certain details and request for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, applicant submitted reply. On completion of proceedings, ld. CIT(E) rejected application vide order dated 23.03.2026.
Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee preferred above captioned appealṣ
Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that the appellant is a registered charitable trust since 31.08.2012. The appellant had submitted reply and documents on 21.01.2026 and 09.03.2026 inter alia mentioning grant of registration u/s 12A of the act vide order dated 27.09.2013 page no. 31 of P.B. i.e before 01.04.2021. Therefore, the reason for rejection is incorrect. The matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E).
Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned orders.
From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(E) rejected applications for registration u/s 12AB and 80G vide impugned orders dated 23.03.2026 by mentioning that the applicant obtained regular registration vide order dated 04.04.2022 without having any order of registration u/s 12A prior to 01.04.2021. However, the order of registration u/s 12A of the Act dated 27.09.2013 which is at page no. 31 of paper book was already submitted before ld. CIT(E). It may be oversite, the same was not taken note of. Therefore, the impugned orders dated 23.03.2026 of ld. CIT(E) are set aside and the matters are restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) for afresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee.
In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant/assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.