ORDER
George George K., Vice President.- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) order dated 03.03.2025 rejecting assessee’s application seeking approval u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’).
2. There is a delay of 160 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The Assessee Trust has filed an affidavit of the Managing Trustee and a petition for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal.
“The petitioner trust filed an online application dated 28.09.2024 in Form 10AB under Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G seeking approval u/s.BOG of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The application seeking registration u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rejected vide order dated 03.03.2025 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai. The petitioner trust is in appeal before the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order dated 03.03.2025. According to section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, the time limit allowed to file an appeal before the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is two months from the end of the month in which the order sought to be appealed against, was received by the petitioner. Therefore appeal should have been filed by the petitioner trust on or before 31.05.2025. However the appeal was filed on 07.11.2025 with a delay of 160 days beyond the time allowed for filing the appeal, which ended on 31.05.2025.
In this connection, the petitioner trust wishes to submit that one of the trustees of the petitioner trust. Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat is also a Director in M/s. Polypipes. On receipt of an SMS alert on the registered mobile number of the petitioner trust, Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat instructed the employee of M/s. Polypipes Shri Karthikeyan to check the income tax portal of the petitioner trust and report on the updates. Unfortunately, after giving such instructions, the trustee Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat inadvertently failed to follow up on the matter and simultaneously the employee Shri. Karthikeyan also failed to revert to the trustee of the petitioner trust Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat.
During the last week of October 2025, the auditor of the petitioner trust visited the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and enquired about the status of the application filed by the petitioner trust. The office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) informed that the application filed by the petitioner trust was rejected vide order dated 03.03.2025. The Chartered Accountant immediately informed the trustee of the petitioner trust Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, who then checked the income tax portal and noticed the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) dated 03.03.2025.
At this juncture, the petitioner trust wishes to place on record that Shri Karthikeyan was subsequently terminated from employment by Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, considering his failure to report the order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) despite being specifically instructed, as a senous lapse in responsibility.
Thereafter, the auditor of the trust also suggested the petitioner trust to approach Shri. T.Banusekar, Advocate to seek further legal guidance. In the first week of November, the trustee of the petitioner trust met Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate who advised that an appeal shall be filed before the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal along with a petition to condone the delay in filing appeal. The appeal was then drafted by the office of Shri.T.Banusekar, Advocate and the same was filed on 07.11.2025 with a delay of 160 days.”
3. On perusal of the reasons stated in the affidavit, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.
4. The solitary issue in this appeal of assessee is the assessee’ application seeking approval u/s. 80G of the Act was rejected by the CIT(E) for the reason that it was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s.80G(5)(iii) of the Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(E) rejecting the assessee’s application reads as follows:-
“4.1 Provisional approval
The applicant trust was established on 04.02.2022 vide its trust deed and has obtained provisional approval u/s 80G from CPC on 10.03.2022 in Form 10AC for the period from AY 2022-23 to AY 202425.
4.2. Further, it is stated that the applicant trust ought to have applied for approval u/s 80G in Form 10AB on or before September 2023 (i.e. 6 months prior to the expiry of the period of provisional approval. In this case, the provisional approval expired on AY 2024-25 relevant to PY 2023-24 and thus the applicant ought to have applied on or before September 2023). For brevity, the relevant provision of section 80G(5)(iii) is reproduced as under:
where the institution or fund has been provisionally approved, at least six months prior to expiry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier.
4.3. However, the CBDT Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 extended the time limit to file application for approval u/s 80G in Form 10AB to 30th June 2024. The relevant extract stated in clause (ii) of the circular is reproduced as under.
3. On consideration of the matter, with a view to avoid and mitigate genuine hardship in such cases, the Board, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119 of the Act. hereby extends the due date of making an application/intimation electronically in –
(ii) Form No. 10AB, in case of an application under clause (iii) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or under subclause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A or under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, till 30.06.2024.
4.4. But in this case, the applicant trust has applied for approval u/s 80G in Form 10AB only after the expiry of extended due date i.e. on 28.09.2024 with the delay of 90 days. Hence, application seeking approval u/s 80G cannot be considered for approval as per the provisions of section 80G (5)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
4.5. It is pertinent to mention that there is no mandatory provision in the Income Tax Act to condone the delay in filing Form 10AB seeking approval u/s 80G as available in condoning the delay in filing Form 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB as per the Finance Act 2024 2024 considering all the above legal provision, I am constrained to reject the belated application filed in Form 10AB seeking approval u/s 80G.
[12:30, 21/01/2026] RSR: 4.6. Therefore, the application dated 28.09.2024 filed in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking approval u/s. 80G is not maintainable for the reasons stated in para 4.1 to 4.5 of this order and hence, the same is rejected.”
5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(E), assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has highlighted that the assessee submitted an application in accordance with clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80G of the Act. According to the previous regulations, the application needed to be submitted by September 2023, which is six months before the conclusion of the provisional approval period that ends on 31.03.2024. Following this, the CBDT released Circular No.7/2024 on 25.04.2024, which extended the deadline for submitting the application to 30.06.2024. The Ld. AR further noted that Section 80G has been amended to include clause (iv) in the first proviso to Section 80G(5), now permitting an assessee that has initiated its activities to apply for approval at any time post commencement. Consequently, it was submitted that the assessee’s application should be evaluated under clause (iv)(B) of Section 80G(5) of the Act. The Ld. AR also referenced the Memorandum that elucidates the provisions of the Finance Bill, 2024, which proposed the insertion of clause (iv) to streamline the timeline for submitting the application for approval, allowing for submission at any time after the initiation of activities. In light of this amendment, the Ld.AR stated that the approval be granted effective from 01.10.2024, which is the date when the amended provisions under clause (iv) of Section 80G(5) take effect. The ld. AR also referred the order of the co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in the cases of Aalayam v. CIT(E) [IT Appeal No.1012(Chny) of 2025, dated 25-7-2025]. Madras Chinmaya Seva Trust v. CIT(E) [IT Appeal No.885(Chny) of 2025, dated 17-10-2025] and order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Chetana v. CIT(E) ITD 91 (Mumbai – Trib.).
6. Per contra, the Ld. DR, has relied on the impugned order of the CIT(E) and pleaded that assessee can now file fresh application as per the amended provision under clause (iv)(B) of Section 80G(5) of the Act.
7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on the record. The assessee submitted an application under clause (iii) of the first proviso to subsection (5) of Section 80G of the Act, seeking approval under section 80G of the Act on 28.09.2024. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application as not maintainable, citing that the assessee did not file the application before 30.06.2024, as stipulated in CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25.04.2024. However, it is important to note that clause (iv) has been added to the first proviso to Section 80G(5) by the Finance Act, 2024, effective from 01.10.2024, allowing the assessee trust to apply for approval under section 80G(5) at any time following the commencement of its activities. This new provision is separate from clause (iii), which governed the previous timeline. The CIT(E) issued the order rejecting the application on 03.03.2025, after the amendment had taken effect, deeming it non-maintainable. Therefore, we direct the CIT(E) to consider the application submitted on 28.09.2024 as filed under clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and to make a decision in accordance with the law. It is ordered accordingly.
8. A similar view was taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Chennai in the case of Madras Chinmaya Seva Trust (supra). The relevant finding of the Tribunal reads as follows:-
“6. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the order of the coordinate Bench of Tribunal in the case of Aalayam v. The CIT(E) referred supra and reviewed the materials available on the record. The assessee submitted an application under clause (iii) of the first proviso to subsection (5) of Section 80G of the Act, seeking approval under section 80G of the Act on 30.09.2024. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application as not maintainable, citing that the assessee did not file the application before 30.06.2024, as stipulated in CBDT Circular No.7/2024 dated 25.04.2024. However, it is important to note that clause (iv) has been added to the first proviso to Section 80G(5) by the Finance Act, 2024, effective from 01.10.2024, allowing the assessee trust to apply for approval under section 80G(5) at any time following the commencement of its activities. This new provision is separate from clause (iii), which governed the previous timeline. The Ld. CIT(E) issued the order rejecting the application on 17.03.2025, after the amendment had taken effect, deeming it non-maintainable. Therefore, we direct the Ld.CIT(E) to consider the application submitted on 30.09.2024 as filed under clause (iv)(B) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and to make a decision in accordance with the law. In light of the above and respectfully following the order of the co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in the case of Aalayam v. The CIT(E), the appeal submitted by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.”
9. Identical view was also taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Aalayam (supra) and Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Chetana (supra).
10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.