I withdrew my Form 10AB before the CIT(E), he then passed an order recording the withdrawal and rejecting the form, and now the portal will not let me file a fresh one. Can I appeal against that order?
No. Where the trust itself withdrew the application, no cause of action arises to prefer an appeal against the order that records the withdrawal and rejects the form, and the appeal is not maintainable. The Tribunal dismissed both the s.12AB and the s.80G appeals on that footing and gave no direction about the portal difficulty that had prompted them.
Decided by the ITAT (Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Keshav Dubey, Judicial Member — ITAT Bangalore "A" Bench) on 2025-05-05, reported as ITA Nos. 395 and 411/Bang/2025. It bears on section 12AB, section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 253 of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Charitable Trusts & Exemption, Appeals and Deductions & Disallowances matters.
This is a trap that costs a trust its whole registration cycle and it is entirely self-inflicted. Withdrawal is often suggested as the tidy way to correct a wrong section code or an incomplete filing, on the assumption that a fresh Form 10AB can be filed at once. If the portal then refuses the fresh filing — which is exactly what happened here — there is nothing to appeal against, because the order the trust wants set aside merely records its own withdrawal. The Tribunal treated the point as jurisdictional, not discretionary: the absence of a cause of action, not the merits, decided it. Note that the trust had also filed a condonation petition asking the Tribunal to direct the CIT(E) to resolve the portal issues and accept a fresh application, and the Tribunal did not act on it. The remedy for a portal failure lies elsewhere — a grievance to the CBDT under s.119, or a writ — not in an appeal under s.253.
Binding on the AO and CIT(A) within the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
The trust filed Form 10AB dated 1 February 2024 for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and Form 10AB dated 3 January 2024 for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii). It subsequently withdrew both applications before the CIT(E). The CIT(E) passed orders recording in each case that the assessee had withdrawn the application and that the Form 10AB was accordingly rejected. Before the Tribunal the Authorised Representative said that the trust was facing technical difficulties in filing fresh applications for approval and registration, and that the appeals had been filed together with condonation petitions seeking a direction to the CIT(E) to resolve those issues and to accept fresh applications. The Departmental Representative submitted in each appeal that the appeal was not maintainable because the trust had itself withdrawn the application.
Both appeals dismissed as not maintainable. Since the trust had itself withdrawn the applications for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) before the CIT(E), no cause of action arises to it to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal, and the appeals are not maintainable (paras 8, 11.1 and 12). No direction was given on the portal difficulties or on the condonation petitions in so far as they sought such a direction.
The Tribunal looked at what the CIT(E)'s orders actually said. In each case the order recorded only that the assessee had withdrawn the Form 10AB and that the form was therefore rejected — there was no adjudication of anything against the trust. On that footing it held in identical terms in both appeals that, the trust having itself withdrawn the application, no cause of action arose to it to prefer the appeal, so that the appeal was not maintainable (paras 7, 8, 11 and 11.1). The reasoning is jurisdictional and does not consider the merits of either application or the trust's inability to re-file.
no cause of action arises to the assessee trust to prefer the present appeal before us
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. Where the trust itself withdrew the application, no cause of action arises to prefer an appeal against the order that records the withdrawal and rejects the form, and the appeal is not maintainable. The Tribunal dismissed both the s.12AB and the s.80G appeals on that footing and gave no direction about the portal difficulty that had prompted them. This was decided by the ITAT (Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Keshav Dubey, Judicial Member — ITAT Bangalore "A" Bench) and bears on section 12AB, section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 253 of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as ITA Nos. 395 and 411/Bang/2025. This is a trap that costs a trust its whole registration cycle and it is entirely self-inflicted. Withdrawal is often suggested as the tidy way to correct a wrong section code or an incomplete filing, on the assumption that a fresh Form 10AB can be filed at once. If the portal then refuses the fresh filing — which is exactly what happened here — there is nothing to appeal against, because the order the trust wants set aside merely records its own withdrawal. The Tribunal treated the point as jurisdictional, not discretionary: the absence of a cause of action, not the merits, decided it. Note that the trust had also filed a condonation petition asking the Tribunal to direct the CIT(E) to resolve the portal issues and accept a fresh application, and the Tribunal did not act on it. The remedy for a portal failure lies elsewhere — a grievance to the CBDT under s.119, or a writ — not in an appeal under s.253. If it applies to you, the first step is this: Do not withdraw a Form 10A or Form 10AB in order to re-file. Ask the CIT(E) instead to treat the application as made under the correct section code, or to permit rectification, and keep the application alive on the file.
The trust filed Form 10AB dated 1 February 2024 for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and Form 10AB dated 3 January 2024 for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii). It subsequently withdrew both applications before the CIT(E). The CIT(E) passed orders recording in each case that the assessee had withdrawn the application and that the Form 10AB was accordingly rejected. Before the Tribunal the Authorised Representative said that the trust was facing technical difficulties in filing fresh applications for approval and registration, and that the appeals had been filed together with condonation petitions seeking a direction to the CIT(E) to resolve those issues and to accept fresh applications. The Departmental Representative submitted in each appeal that the appeal was not maintainable because the trust had itself withdrawn the application. The matter was decided on 2025-05-05 by the ITAT (Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Keshav Dubey, Judicial Member — ITAT Bangalore "A" Bench). On those facts the ITAT held as follows. Both appeals dismissed as not maintainable. Since the trust had itself withdrawn the applications for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) before the CIT(E), no cause of action arises to it to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal, and the appeals are not maintainable (paras 8, 11.1 and 12). No direction was given on the portal difficulties or on the condonation petitions in so far as they sought such a direction.
The Tribunal looked at what the CIT(E)'s orders actually said. In each case the order recorded only that the assessee had withdrawn the Form 10AB and that the form was therefore rejected — there was no adjudication of anything against the trust. On that footing it held in identical terms in both appeals that, the trust having itself withdrawn the application, no cause of action arose to it to prefer the appeal, so that the appeal was not maintainable (paras 7, 8, 11 and 11.1). The reasoning is jurisdictional and does not consider the merits of either application or the trust's inability to re-file. In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "no cause of action arises to the assessee trust to prefer the present appeal before us"
It was decided by the ITAT on 2025-05-05 and is reported as ITA Nos. 395 and 411/Bang/2025. Binding on the AO and CIT(A) within the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere. A Tribunal decision binds the assessing officer and the Commissioner (Appeals) within that Tribunal's jurisdiction, and is persuasive before other benches. It is not binding on a High Court, and a contrary co-ordinate bench decision will be argued against you, so check whether the point has been taken the other way before you build a reply around it. On section 12AB, section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 253, 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 department, and it appears in this library for that reason — you need to know what the Assessing Officer will cite against you. Both appeals dismissed as not maintainable. Since the trust had itself withdrawn the applications for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) before the CIT(E), no cause of action arises to it to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal, and the appeals are not maintainable (paras 8, 11.1 and 12). No direction was given on the portal difficulties or on the condonation petitions in so far as they sought such a direction. It arises in Charitable Trusts & Exemption, Appeals and Deductions & Disallowances matters, on section 12AB, section 12A(1)(ac)(iii), section 80G, section 80G(5), section 80G(5)(iii), section 253 of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Keshav Dubey, Judicial Member — ITAT Bangalore "A" Bench. 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. If a withdrawal has already been made, do not spend the appeal period on an appeal to the Tribunal — it will be dismissed as not maintainable. File a fresh application, and where the portal refuses it, record the refusal and pursue it as a grievance rather than as an appeal. Where the portal blocks a filing, preserve dated screenshots and error logs at the time; they are the only evidence a later forum will have, and other benches have acted on them. Before withdrawing anything, check the consequence for the subsisting registration and for s.115TD; the withdrawal here left the trust with neither a live application nor an appealable order. If the deadline is the reason for wanting to withdraw and re-file, consider instead the condonation proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) for registration, or clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) for approval, both available from 1 October 2024.
Searched for later treatment; none was found. That is not the same as a source affirming it. The citator returns nothing. A case-name search returns 205 documents but they all concern a different institution, the Imam Ahmed Raza Education Society in Maharashtra, in Bombay High Court school and service litigation; nothing concerns the Haveri trust or this order. No appeal to the Karnataka High Court was traced and no Bench has cited the holding that an appeal against a withdrawn Form 10AB application is not maintainable. 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 order's numbering runs 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10.1, 11, 11.1, 12, which I established by transcribing the opening words of each in sequence. Paragraph 11 says that the CIT(E) "has dismissed the appeal of the assessee", which is a slip — the CIT(E) rejected an application and no appeal lay before him; paragraph 7 uses the correct language. The order records the applications as having been made under "section 12(1)(ac)(iii)", omitting the A in 12A. Paragraphs 2 and 3 to 3.4 deal with condonation of a delay in filing the appeals themselves and are not reproduced here. 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.
Both appeals dismissed as not maintainable. Since the trust had itself withdrawn the applications for approval under s.80G(5)(iii) and for registration under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) before the CIT(E), no cause of action arises to it to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal, and the appeals are not maintainable (paras 8, 11.1 and 12). No direction was given on the portal difficulties or on the condonation petitions in so far as they sought such a direction.
TaxSphere, “Imam Ahmed Raza Educational and Welfare Trust v CIT (Exemptions), Bangalore”, https://taxnotice.vittsphere.com/caselaw/case/imam-ahmed-raza-withdrawn-form-10ab-appeal-not-maintainable/ (validity last checked 2026-09-08)
The judgment itself is a government work and may be quoted freely. The summary, the validity note and the reasoning on this page are this library's own writing: quote them with attribution, and please do not present either as the words of the court — this page keeps the two apart and so should a quotation of it.
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
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?
My Form 10AB for final registration under s.12AB was rejected as time-barred because I missed the 30 June 2024 date in Circular 7/2024. Is anything left to me?
My trust filed Form 10BD for the whole financial year although its s.80G provisional approval began mid-year, so Forms 10BE were generated for pre-approval donations too. The CIT (Exemption) has refused final registration and approval on that ground. Is that a valid reason?
I did not file the Rule 17A documents in time and the CIT(E) rejected my Form 10AB, cancelled the provisional registration and directed computation of tax under s.115TD. Can a rejection for non-filing carry all that?
