ITAT Sets Aside Rejection of Section 12AB Registration and 80G Approval, Remands Case for Fresh Adjudication:

ITAT Sets Aside Rejection of Section 12AB Registration and 80G Approval, Remands Case for Fresh Adjudication The ITAT Mumbai has set aside the CIT(E)'s order rejecting the renewal of Section 12AB registration and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act for the Rotary Club of Bombay Pier Charities Trust. Both matters have been sent back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. In the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [CIT(E)] had rejected the assessee's application dated September 29, 2025, filed in Form 10AB, seeking renewal of its registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, primarily on the grounds that the assessee had not furnished all the relevant documents and details sought by them via notices dated January 09 and 23, 2026.

Also Read

Govt Authorises Groww, Upstox, ICICI Securities and Two Others to Use Aadhaar Authentication Under PMLA 2002

Being aggrieved with the decision of the CIT(E), the assessee approached ITAT Mumbai, arguing that the trust deed, registration certificate, FCRA registration, financial statements, ITR acknowledgements and other relevant details were filed before the CIT(E); however, its application was still rejected. The assessee further flagged that it had been carrying out charitable activities for more than 33 years and had been granted registration in earlier years. When the tribunal analysed the case, it noted that the CIT(E)’s order did not clearly specify which documents were missing or what exact compliance had not been made. The rejection was based only on a general allegation of non-compliance without examining the trust’s objects or the genuineness of its activities.

Also Read

Supreme Court Upholds 28% Retrospective GST on Online Gaming, Calls Real-Money Games ‘Betting and Gambling’

The ITAT held that while considering an application under Section 12AB, the authority must properly examine the trust’s objectives and activities after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Since the impugned order was cryptic and lacked detailed reasoning, it could not be sustained. Accordingly, the Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to reconsider the application under Section 12AB after providing a fair opportunity to the trust. Since the rejection of approval under Section 80G was linked to the rejection under Section 12AB, that matter was also restored for fresh adjudication.