My Form 10AB was rejected before April 2024 because it was late or filed under the wrong section code. Is that rejection the end of the matter?
No. The Calcutta High Court, dismissing the Revenue's appeal, recorded that clause 4.1 of CBDT Circular No. 7 of 2024 dated 25 April 2024 allows a trust whose Form 10AB was rejected on or before the issue of that circular solely because it was furnished after the due date or under the wrong section code to furnish a fresh Form 10AB within the extended time in paragraph 3(ii), namely 30 June 2024. The Court also approved the Tribunal's construction that a trust becomes eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval, so the clause (iii) time limit must be read in that light.
Decided by the High Court (T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya J — High Court at Calcutta, Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax), Original Side) on 2024-04-26, reported as ITAT/77/2024 with IA No. GA/2/2024. It bears on section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 12A, section 119, section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Charitable Trusts & Exemption, Deductions & Disallowances and Appeals matters.
This is the highest authority I could find on the transitional mess and it does two useful things. It states, from the Bench, what clause 4.1 of Circular 7/2024 actually provides — a fresh-application route rather than a mere extension — which matters because a Commissioner is likely to treat an earlier rejection as res judicata. And it approves the reading that a provisionally approved institution cannot apply for final approval before provisional approval is granted, so the clause (iii) window cannot begin earlier than that grant. The limits are real. The Court expressly said the issue had become virtually academic because the trust had by then been granted registration on remand, so the reasoning is not laboured; and the fresh-application route in clause 4.1 was tied to 30 June 2024, a date that has passed. What remains available to a late applicant today is the condonation proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) for registration and clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) for approval, both from 1 October 2024.
Binding within that High Court's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
The Revenue appealed under s.260A against the order dated 13 September 2023 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos. 730 and 731/Kol/2023 for AY 2023-24. It proposed three questions: whether the Tribunal was justified in treating the Form 10AB application for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) as within time, when such an application must be filed within six months of commencement of activities or six months before the expiry of provisional approval whichever is earlier; whether it was justified in so holding when the application was filed on 3 December 2022 although activities had commenced in AY 2020-21; and whether it was justified in not appreciating that there is a strict timeline under s.80G(5)(iii) and that the CIT(E) has no power to condone delay in filing Form 10AB. The trust had been granted provisional approval on 30 November 2022 and had applied for final registration under clause (iii) of the first proviso to s.80G(5). On the Tribunal's remand the Commissioner had since granted the trust registration.
The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the stay application dismissed with it. No question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose. The issue had virtually become academic because registration had been granted on the remand made by the Tribunal. The Court further recorded the terms of clause 4.1 of Circular No. 7 of 2024, and on the facts held that the Tribunal had rightly granted relief, the proviso being read as meaning that after the grant of provisional registration a trust which has not commenced activities may apply within six months of commencement or within six months before the expiry of provisional approval, whichever is earlier, and that in any case the assessee is eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval.
The Court identified the short question as whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's appeal and directing registration under s.80G(5) to be granted. It began with the fact that the Tribunal had restored the matter for a decision afresh on the merits and that registration had since been granted, which made the issue virtually academic. It then took note of Circular No. 7 of 2024 dated 25 April 2024 extending the due date for filing Forms 10A and 10AB, and set out clause 4.1, under which a trust whose Form 10AB had been rejected by the Commissioner on or before the issue of the circular solely because the application was furnished after the due date or under the wrong section code may furnish a fresh Form 10AB within the extended time in paragraph 3(ii), that is by 30 June 2024. Finally it accepted the Tribunal's finding on the facts — provisional approval granted on 30 November 2022, application under clause (iii) of the first proviso — and its construction that the assessee is in any event eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval. On that basis it found no substantial question of law.
Therefore, in our view, the present issue has virtually become academic.
Upload it and we will read it, work out your deadline and draft the reply. A CA reviews before anything is filed.
Handle my notice → Ask a CA on WhatsAppNo. The Calcutta High Court, dismissing the Revenue's appeal, recorded that clause 4.1 of CBDT Circular No. 7 of 2024 dated 25 April 2024 allows a trust whose Form 10AB was rejected on or before the issue of that circular solely because it was furnished after the due date or under the wrong section code to furnish a fresh Form 10AB within the extended time in paragraph 3(ii), namely 30 June 2024. The Court also approved the Tribunal's construction that a trust becomes eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval, so the clause (iii) time limit must be read in that light. This was decided by the High Court (T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya J — High Court at Calcutta, Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax), Original Side) and bears on section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 12A, section 119, section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as ITAT/77/2024 with IA No. GA/2/2024. This is the highest authority I could find on the transitional mess and it does two useful things. It states, from the Bench, what clause 4.1 of Circular 7/2024 actually provides — a fresh-application route rather than a mere extension — which matters because a Commissioner is likely to treat an earlier rejection as res judicata. And it approves the reading that a provisionally approved institution cannot apply for final approval before provisional approval is granted, so the clause (iii) window cannot begin earlier than that grant. The limits are real. The Court expressly said the issue had become virtually academic because the trust had by then been granted registration on remand, so the reasoning is not laboured; and the fresh-application route in clause 4.1 was tied to 30 June 2024, a date that has passed. What remains available to a late applicant today is the condonation proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) for registration and clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) for approval, both from 1 October 2024. If it applies to you, the first step is this: If your Form 10AB was rejected on or before 25 April 2024 solely for lateness or a wrong section code and you filed a fresh Form 10AB by 30 June 2024, cite clause 4.1 of Circular 7/2024 and this judgment to stop the Commissioner treating the earlier rejection as final.
The Revenue appealed under s.260A against the order dated 13 September 2023 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos. 730 and 731/Kol/2023 for AY 2023-24. It proposed three questions: whether the Tribunal was justified in treating the Form 10AB application for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) as within time, when such an application must be filed within six months of commencement of activities or six months before the expiry of provisional approval whichever is earlier; whether it was justified in so holding when the application was filed on 3 December 2022 although activities had commenced in AY 2020-21; and whether it was justified in not appreciating that there is a strict timeline under s.80G(5)(iii) and that the CIT(E) has no power to condone delay in filing Form 10AB. The trust had been granted provisional approval on 30 November 2022 and had applied for final registration under clause (iii) of the first proviso to s.80G(5). On the Tribunal's remand the Commissioner had since granted the trust registration. The matter was decided on 2024-04-26 by the High Court (T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya J — High Court at Calcutta, Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax), Original Side). On those facts the High Court held as follows. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the stay application dismissed with it. No question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose. The issue had virtually become academic because registration had been granted on the remand made by the Tribunal. The Court further recorded the terms of clause 4.1 of Circular No. 7 of 2024, and on the facts held that the Tribunal had rightly granted relief, the proviso being read as meaning that after the grant of provisional registration a trust which has not commenced activities may apply within six months of commencement or within six months before the expiry of provisional approval, whichever is earlier, and that in any case the assessee is eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval.
The Court identified the short question as whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's appeal and directing registration under s.80G(5) to be granted. It began with the fact that the Tribunal had restored the matter for a decision afresh on the merits and that registration had since been granted, which made the issue virtually academic. It then took note of Circular No. 7 of 2024 dated 25 April 2024 extending the due date for filing Forms 10A and 10AB, and set out clause 4.1, under which a trust whose Form 10AB had been rejected by the Commissioner on or before the issue of the circular solely because the application was furnished after the due date or under the wrong section code may furnish a fresh Form 10AB within the extended time in paragraph 3(ii), that is by 30 June 2024. Finally it accepted the Tribunal's finding on the facts — provisional approval granted on 30 November 2022, application under clause (iii) of the first proviso — and its construction that the assessee is in any event eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval. On that basis it found no substantial question of law. In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "Therefore, in our view, the present issue has virtually become academic."
It was decided by the High Court on 2024-04-26 and is reported as ITAT/77/2024 with IA No. GA/2/2024. Binding within that High Court's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere. A High Court decision binds the assessing officer, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal within that state, and is persuasive elsewhere. If your assessment is in a different jurisdiction, check whether your own High Court has taken the same view before relying on it. On section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 12A, section 119, section 260A, the practical question is whether the facts of your own notice match the facts of this case closely enough for the same rule to apply.
It helps the taxpayer. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the stay application dismissed with it. No question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose. The issue had virtually become academic because registration had been granted on the remand made by the Tribunal. The Court further recorded the terms of clause 4.1 of Circular No. 7 of 2024, and on the facts held that the Tribunal had rightly granted relief, the proviso being read as meaning that after the grant of provisional registration a trust which has not commenced activities may apply within six months of commencement or within six months before the expiry of provisional approval, whichever is earlier, and that in any case the assessee is eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval. It arises in Charitable Trusts & Exemption, Deductions & Disallowances and Appeals matters, on section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 12A, section 119, section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by T.S. Sivagnanam, Chief Justice and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya J — High Court at Calcutta, Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax), Original Side. Before relying on it, read the source linked on this page and check whether it has since been distinguished, overruled or overtaken by an amendment to the Income Tax Act. In practice the steps that follow from it are these. Where the Commissioner computes the clause (iii) window from a date earlier than the grant of provisional approval, take the point approved here — an institution is eligible to apply for final registration only after provisional approval is granted. Do not rely on this judgment for a proposition of law about condonation; the Court decided that no substantial question of law arose and treated the matter as academic on the facts. For an application that is late today, move to the current routes instead: the condonation proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) for s.12AB registration, and clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) for s.80G approval. When an appeal is pending and the Commissioner has meanwhile granted registration on remand, tell the appellate forum — the grant is what made the Revenue's appeal academic here.
Validity check could not be completed. Validity check could not be completed — I did not search for any special leave petition or later treatment. The reasoning is expressly conditioned on the issue having become academic, so its weight as authority on the construction of s.80G(5)(iii) is limited. The fresh-application route in clause 4.1 of Circular 7/2024 was tied to 30 June 2024 and that date has passed; the current routes for a late applicant are the proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) (registration), inserted by Act No. 15 of 2024 with effect from 1 October 2024, and clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) (approval), which is an older clause that the same Act opened up from the same date by omitting the words confining item (B) to an institution no part of whose income had been excluded under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of s.10(23C) or under s.11 or s.12. No source could be cited for that finding. Checking whether an authority still stands matters as much as knowing what it held: a decision may be overruled on one point and survive on another, or the provision it interprets may have been amended since. Read the source and the editor's note on this page before relying on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal.
The judgment is numbered only at its start — paragraphs 1 to 4, ending with "The short question which falls for consideration" — and everything after that, including the passage quoted here and the reproduction of clause 4.1 of the circular, is unnumbered; the key_quote is therefore located by description rather than by number. Two apparent slips are in the report itself and survived a second, independent pass, so they are the reporter's or the Court's and not mine: the authority whose order the Tribunal set aside is twice called "the Commissioner of Income tax (Customs), Kolkata, [C.I.T (Customs)]", which must be the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions); and the Court records that the assessee "has been granted 12-year registration", which is very likely a slip for registration under s.12A. I could not open Circular 7/2024 itself — the departmental URL incometaxindia.gov.in/communications/circular/circular-no-7-2024.pdf returns 404 — so the circular's terms are taken from this judgment's reproduction of clause 4.1 and, independently, from the CIT(E)'s order reproducing clause 3(ii) at paragraph 4.3 of Sri Sastha Charitable Trust (ITAT Chennai, ITA No.839/CHNY/2025, 3 September 2025). This library shows the verification state of every entry openly. This entry has not yet been read in full by a chartered accountant. The summary reflects the sources listed on this page. Read the source before you rely on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the stay application dismissed with it. No question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose. The issue had virtually become academic because registration had been granted on the remand made by the Tribunal. The Court further recorded the terms of clause 4.1 of Circular No. 7 of 2024, and on the facts held that the Tribunal had rightly granted relief, the proviso being read as meaning that after the grant of provisional registration a trust which has not commenced activities may apply within six months of commencement or within six months before the expiry of provisional approval, whichever is earlier, and that in any case the assessee is eligible to apply for final registration only after the grant of provisional approval.
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
We charge fees for our public utility work. Does that cost us charitable status under s.2(15)?
Our trust was formed weeks ago and has done nothing yet. Can registration be refused for that?
Can interest under ss.234A, 234B and 234C be waived?
You gave particulars, paid by cheque and got a confirmation. Has the burden shifted?