ITAT Restores Trust’s 80G Registration Application Rejected on Technical Grounds:

ITAT sets aside rejection of 80G application citing CBDT Circular; directs CIT(E) to treat application as timely and decide on merits

ITAT Restores 80G Application Rejected on Technical Delay, Directs Fresh Adjudication

Meetu Kumari

Aug 9, 2025

Last update on Aug 9, 2025

ITAT Restores Trust’s 80G Registration Application Rejected on Technical Grounds

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act in Form 10AB on 22/12/2024. The CIT (Exemption), issued notices through the ITBA portal on 28/01/2025 and 04/04/2025 seeking clarifications and additional documents. Unsatisfied with the responses, the CIT(E) rejected the application, holding it was filed beyond the permitted time under clause (iii) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5).

The assessee argued that provisional registration was valid until 31/03/2026, and it had applied six months prior with a bona fide intention. It further submitted that CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 acknowledged errors in section codes as a common issue, and therefore, the rejection on technical grounds was unjustified. The Revenue supported the order of the CIT(E). Aggrieved, the assessee filed this appeal before the ITAT on the following ground.

Issue Before ITAT: Whether rejection of the assessee’s Section 80G application solely on the ground of delay, despite no adverse findings on merits, was valid in law. ITAT's Decision: The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection and remanding the matter to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

The appellant body observed that the assessee had been registered under Section 80G since 2011 and that the rejection stemmed solely from a technical delay. It observed that CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 recognized errors such as incorrect section codes as a common occurrence, and in this case, the assessee’s explanation that it believed the provisional registration was valid until 31/03/2026 was plausible.

The Tribunal held that in the absence of adverse findings on the genuineness of activities, it was reasonable that the application be decided on merits rather than dismissed for a technical lapse. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(E) was set aside, with directions to treat the application as filed in time, grant the assessee reasonable opportunity to produce requisite documents, and decide afresh the matter before it.

The assessee was warned not to seek adjournments after this, failing which the CIT(E) reserved the right to proceed in accordance with law.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.