Section 12AB

Section 12AB — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section 12AB, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• Chamber of Tax Consultants v CIT (Exemptions) High CourtHelps taxpayer
  The CIT (Exemptions) refused our trust's registration under s.12AB because the trust deed has no irrevocability or dissolution clause, and treated our 'Yes' in Row 6 of Form 10AB as false information. Is that a lawful ground of refusal?
  No, on both counts. Section 12AB tells the Commissioner what to satisfy himself about — the objects, the genuineness of the activities, and compliance with other laws material to achieving the objects — and an express irrevocability clause is not among them and cannot be implied. A public charitable trust is irrevocable by operation of law unless the deed itself reserves a power of revocation. And an answer the Department's own e-filing utility compelled the applicant to give cannot be turned against it as 'false or incorrect information'. The Bombay High Court quashed the rejections before it and also quashed every other order rejecting renewal on the same grounds.
• Pavai Varam Educational Trust v PCIT (Central), Chennai ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  The PCIT cancelled my registration under s.12AB(4) for a specified violation resting entirely on an addition made in assessment. The Tribunal has since deleted that addition. Does the cancellation survive?
  No. Where the order under s.12AB(4) is founded entirely on the outcome of another proceeding, its fate depends on the sustainability of that foundational finding; once the Tribunal reversed the quantum findings on which the alleged specified violation rested, the cancellation could not survive independently. The Tribunal set aside the cancellation and directed restoration of the registration.
• Humanitarian Hands v ITO (Exemptions) Ward-1, Bengaluru ITATCuts both waysNo later treatment found
  Our auditor filed Form 10BB when Form 10B was required for AY 2023-24, and CPC has taxed us under s.13(10). We filed the right form only in 2025 and the condonation application is still pending. What can the Tribunal do?
  The Tribunal remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer to pass an order in accordance with the outcome of the pending s.119(2)(b) condonation application before the CIT (Exemptions). It recorded that this was not a case of no audit report at all but of a report filed both belatedly and in the incorrect form, and that CBDT Circular No. 2/2024 did not rescue the trust because that circular only covered wrong-form reports furnished on or before 31 October 2023.
• School Managing Society Capt. Gurcharan Singh v DCIT/ITO (Exemptions) ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  We missed the s.12AB re-registration, CPC has taxed our entire gross receipts, and we never claimed s.10(23C)(iiiad) in the return. Can we claim it now, in appeal?
  Yes, on these facts. The Amritsar Bench held that a school whose annual receipts are well below the prescribed limit is legally entitled to s.10(23C)(iiiad) even though the claim was made for the first time before the appellate authorities, because it is a question of law arising from material already on record. The sub-clause requires no registration and no approval, so the loss of s.11 for want of s.12AB registration does not touch it.
• Jhaverbhai Patel Research Centre v CIT (Exemptions) ITATHelps taxpayer
  Our Form 10AB went in 38 days after the Charity Commissioner's order instead of 30, and the CIT (Exemptions) rejected it on that ground and on how we had spent our money. Is there a way back?
  Yes, though what you get is a remand and not registration. The Mumbai Tribunal held that the delay should not be visited on the trust — the Charity Commissioner's order had reached it late, and measured from receipt the application was within thirty days — and that the authority must adopt a liberal and justice-oriented approach. It also rejected the second ground, holding that a scholarship paid in India, in rupees, to an Indian student who then studies abroad is not an application of income outside India. It did not itself pass an order condoning the delay: it set aside the CIT (Exemptions)'s order, restored the application to him to be decided on its merits, and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.
• Advaya Charitable Foundation v CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  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?
  Yes. From 1 October 2024 a proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) lets the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner condone a delay in filing the application where he considers there is reasonable cause, and the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(E) with liberty to the trust to make a condonation application. The delay itself was not in dispute; what saved the trust was that the rejection order recorded no defect in its objects, its activities or its documents, its bona fides were not questioned, and the delay did not prima facie appear deliberate.
• Infosys Green Forum v ITO (Exemptions) ITATHelps department
  We set up a section 8 company to hold a CSR asset that supplies its output back to the founder company. Will it get registration under s.12AB?
  On these facts, no. The Bangalore Tribunal accepted that running a solar power plant is preservation of the environment and so falls within s.2(15). But the plant's entire output went to the founder, at a rate below what the founder would otherwise have paid, with the founder keeping all the green benefits. There being no benefit to the public or to a section of the public, the dominant object was the founder's own, and registration under s.12AB and approval under s.80G were both refused.
• JITO Incubation and Innovation Foundation v CIT (Exemption), Mumbai ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  The CIT(E) refused my Form 10AB because the memorandum says the objects may be carried out in India 'and elsewhere'. Is a possible application of funds outside India a ground to refuse registration?
  No. What the Commissioner has to satisfy himself about at the registration stage under s.12AB(1)(b) is the objects of the trust, the genuineness of its activities and compliance with other laws material to achieving its objects. Whether income has actually been applied within or outside India is a question that arises only when exemption under s.11 is claimed, and refusing registration on that ground is premature.
• Care and Share Charitable Trust v CIT (Exemptions), Chennai ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  My Form 10AB for final approval under s.80G was rejected for a delay of two days and the CIT(E) says he has no power to condone it for 80G. Is that right, and is there a way round?
  The CIT(E) is right that s.80G carries no condonation power — the proviso inserted in 2024 permitting condonation sits in s.12A(1)(ac) and governs registration, not 80G approval. The way round is clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to s.80G(5) — a clause that is older than the 2024 amendment and was not inserted by it, but which the Finance (No. 2) Act 2024 opened up with effect from 1 October 2024 by omitting the words that had confined 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 for any previous year ending on or before the date of application — so that an institution whose activities have commenced may now apply at any time after commencement; the Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to treat the out-of-time clause (iii) application as one made under clause (iv)(B) and to decide it on the merits.
• Haji Pir Mohmad Yusuf Waqf v CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad ITATHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  The CIT(E) has rejected my Form 10AB and cancelled my provisional registration on the ground that my objects benefit only one religious community. What is the Revenue's case and how does it succeed?
  It succeeds where the objects on their face are confined to one community and the trust files no evidence that it has not incurred expenditure on those objects. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no infirmity in an order which rejected the Form 10AB application under s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) and cancelled the provisional registration on the footing of a specified violation under clause (d) of the Explanation to s.12AB(4).
• Lakulish Sanatan Sanskriti Prabodhan Abhiyan v CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  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?
  Not without an inquiry into the merits. The Tribunal set the order aside and restored the matter for de novo consideration, holding that the CIT(E) had rejected the application solely for non-filing of documents, after only two notices at very short intervals, without any verification or inquiry, and that procedural lapses alone should not result in denial of substantial justice. It did not decide the s.115TD point, which was raised only in argument.
• CMR Engineering Educational Society v DCIT ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  After a search the PCIT (Central) has cancelled my society's registration under s.12AB(4) for a 'specified violation', relying on loose sheets and statements. Does he have to prove one of the listed violations, or is a general finding of misuse enough?
  He has to prove one of the listed violations. Section 12AB(4) as amended by the Finance Act 2022 is not a general power to withdraw registration: cancellation can follow only on the occurrence of one or more of the 'specified violations' defined in the Explanation to that sub-section, and the onus of establishing that occurrence lies on the Department. Suspicion, however strong, will not do.
• MAA Sharda Kothari Foundation v CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  The CIT(E) rejected my Form 10AB as premature because the trust had not yet started activities or received donations. Can he do that?
  No — not on that ground alone. Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) fixes only the outer date by which a provisionally registered trust must apply for regular registration; it contains no bar on applying earlier, and rejecting an application as premature because activities had not commenced by the date of filing is not in accordance with the legislative intent of that clause read with s.12AB(1)(b).
• Bhagwandas Zalani Family Charitable Trust v CIT (Exemption), Bhopal ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  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?
  Not on its own. The Indore Bench held that a wrong filing of information in Form 10BD does not mean the trust's activities are not genuine, and that the requirement was new from 1 April 2021 with sub-rule (3)(i) of Rule 18AB in terms speaking of all donations of the same nature paid during the financial year, so a trust could honestly have read it as covering the whole year. Because the trust filed fresh evidence — declarations from donors that they had never been given the Forms 10BE and had claimed no deduction — the matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
• Hemkunt Foundations v PCIT ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  The PCIT cancelled our 12A registration after a survey. Was he even allowed to do that?
  No, on both counts here. Authority to grant or cancel registration under s.12AB lies with the CIT (Exemption), not the Principal Commissioner, and the 'specified violation' clause in s.12AB(4) took effect on 1 April 2022, so it cannot be applied to conduct in financial year 2020-21 or 2021-22.
• Lala Sher Singh Memorial Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society v PCIT (Central) ITATHelps taxpayer
  The PCIT has cancelled our registration under s.12AB(4) for 'specified violations' said to have occurred in years going back to 2015-16. Can s.12AB(4) reach back that far?
  The Delhi Tribunal held it cannot. The concept of a 'specified violation' in the Explanation to s.12AB(4) was brought in with effect from 1 April 2022, so it cannot be applied to alleged violations of assessment years 2015-16 to 2021-22. The Tribunal also held that the cancellation was passed by the wrong officer: under the CBDT notifications constituting the Commissioner (Exemptions), it is that Commissioner and not the PCIT (Central) to whom the Assessing Officer is subordinate who deals with a trust's registration. The cancellation orders were quashed.
• Imam Ahmed Raza Educational and Welfare Trust v CIT (Exemptions), Bangalore ITATHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  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.
• Statutory position — s.12AB registration periods, the Finance Act 2025 ten-year proviso for small trusts, and the Finance (No. 2) Act 2024 power to condone a late application CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both ways
  How long does registration under s.12AB now run, is the ten-year period for small trusts real, and is there still any way to save a late Form 10A or Form 10AB?
  Registration under s.12AB(1)(a) and under s.12AB(1)(b)(ii)(A) runs five years; provisional registration under s.12AB(1)(c) runs three years from the assessment year for which registration is sought. The ten-year period is real but narrower than it is usually described: a proviso to s.12AB(1) inserted by the Finance Act 2025 (Act No. 7 of 2025) with effect from 1 April 2025 substitutes ten years for five where the application is under sub-clauses (i) to (v) of s.12A(1)(ac) and the total income of the trust, without giving effect to ss.11 and 12, did not exceed rupees five crores in each of the two previous years preceding the previous year in which the application is made — it does not lengthen the three-year provisional registration under clause (c). Separately, a proviso to s.12A(1)(ac) inserted by Act No. 15 of 2024 with effect from 1 October 2024 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to condone a delay in filing where he considers there is a reasonable cause, and the application is then deemed to have been filed within time.
• Statutory position — s.12AC: a registered trust may merge into another without Chapter XII-EB, but only on three conditions, one of which is still to be prescribed CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both waysNo later treatment found
  Our society wants to merge into a larger trust that does the same work. Both are registered. Will the merger trigger the exit tax on accreted income, and what do we have to get right?
  Section 12AC, inserted after section 12AB by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 with effect from 1 April 2025, says that where a trust or institution registered under section 12AB, or approved under sub-clause (iv), (v), (vi) or (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, merges with another trust or institution, the provisions of Chapter XII-EB shall not apply if three conditions are met: the other trust or institution has same or similar objects; the other trust or institution is registered under section 12AA or section 12AB or approved under those same sub-clauses of section 10(23C); and the merger fulfils such conditions as may be prescribed. Chapter XII-EB is the exit tax — the charge on accreted income under section 115TD, the interest under section 115TE and the personal liability under section 115TF. Where any of the three conditions fails, the section simply does not apply and the Chapter is left in place.
• CBDT Circular No. 2/2024 — audit report filed in the wrong form CBDT Circulars & InstructionsHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  For AY 2023-24 my trust filed Form 10B when Form 10BB was the right form. Is there a CBDT relaxation, and what exactly does it cover?
  Yes, but it is narrow. By Circular No. 2/2024 dated 5 March 2024 the CBDT allowed trusts and institutions that had furnished an audit report on or before 31 October 2023 in Form No. 10B where Form No. 10BB was applicable, and vice versa, to furnish the audit report in the applicable form for AY 2023-24 on or before 31 March 2024. It covers only AY 2023-24, only a wrong-form filing that was itself made by 31 October 2023, and the window it gave has closed.
• Statutory position — section 115TD: the exit tax on accreted income, and the Finance Act 2022 extension to a mere failure to re-apply in time CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both waysNo later treatment found
  We simply missed the deadline for the fresh application under s.12A(1)(ac). We have not been cancelled and nobody has rejected anything. Can the exit tax under s.115TD really apply to us?
  Yes. Since the Finance Act 2022, s.115TD(3)(iii) deems a specified person to have been converted into a form not eligible for registration where it simply fails to make the application required by s.12A(1)(ac)(i), (ii) or (iii), or by the corresponding clauses of the first proviso to s.10(23C), within the period specified, where that period expires in the previous year. The consequence is tax on accreted income at the maximum marginal rate, payable within fourteen days of the end of that previous year, in addition to any income tax otherwise chargeable, with no credit and no deduction against it.
• Statutory position — s.115BBDA: the ten per cent charge on a resident shareholder receiving dividend above ten lakh rupees, and why it sat on top of DDT rather than instead of it CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both waysSuperseded by amendment
  My client got a notice charging ten per cent on his dividend income under s.115BBDA even though the companies had already paid DDT. Is that double taxation, and for which years does it apply?
  Section 115BBDA charges a specified assessee resident in India, whose total income includes dividend in aggregate exceeding ten lakh rupees declared, distributed or paid by a domestic company or companies on or before 31 March 2020, to income-tax at ten per cent on the amount of such dividend in aggregate exceeding ten lakh rupees, plus the tax on the rest of his income computed as if the dividend were excluded. Sub-section (2) bars any deduction for expenditure or allowance and any set off of loss in computing that dividend income, and the Explanation excludes a s.2(22)(e) deemed dividend and takes a domestic company, a s.10(23C)(iv)/(v)/(vi)/(via) fund, institution, trust, university or hospital, and a trust or institution registered under s.12A, s.12AA or s.12AB out of 'specified assessee'.

Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.