आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में , हैदराबाद ‘बी’ बेंच , हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad , , श्रीरवीशसूद माननीयन्याययकसदस्यएवंश्रीमिुसूदन सावडिया माननीयलेखासदस्य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.893 and 894/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2025-26)

Srisivakesava Sridatta Kshetra Vs. Income Tax Officer, Seva Samajam, Addanki, Ward – 1, Prakasam District. Ongole.

PAN : ABVAS5895E (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Assessee Advocate Represented by राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Department Represented by CIT-DR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ : 06.08.2025 (Hybrid Hearing)

Date of Conclusion of Hearing घोर्णध की तधरीख/ : 20.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement

O R D E R

प्रनत रवीश सूद, जे.एम./PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M.

The present appeals have been filed by the assessee society against the respective orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(Exemptions)”], dated 12.03.2025 and 17.03.2025 rejecting its applications filed in “Form No.

10AB” for regular registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G(5)

of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”).

2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee society in ITA No.893/Hyd/2025, wherein it has assailed the order passed by the CIT(Exemption) declining its application for regular registration u/s

12AB of the Act on the following grounds of appeal before us:

“1. The order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of IT (Exemptions) in Form No. 10AD dt. 12.03.2025, rejecting the application for grant of permanent registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act, 1961 is bad in law, and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The Ld. CIT(E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act on the ground of delay in filing Form 10AB by 84 days, without appreciating that as per section 12A(1)(ac) (iii), the application was filed within the prescribed period I.e., within six months from the date of commencement of activities on dt. 28.03.2024 within the statutory time limit. and was thus well within the statutory time limit.

3. Without prejudice to ground no.2, the Ld. CIT(E) has grossly erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act on the ground of alleged delay of 84 days in filing the application, without appreciating the bona fides of the appellant's case and the charitable nature of its activities.

4. Without prejudice to Ground No. 2,3 even assuming for a moment but without conceding that there is a delay, however, the Ld. CIT(E) has failed to appreciate that the delay in filing Form No. 10AB is covered under the proviso to section 12A (1) (ac), which was inserted with effect from dt.01.10.2024, thereby conferring discretionary powers upon the competent authority to condone the delay in deserving cases.

5. Without prejudice to the above, the impugned order is not in order by failure to consider that the appellant is engaged in charitable activities and in line with the objects of the trust.

6. For the aforesaid reasons and such other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing, the appellant respectfully prays that the impugned order dt.12.03.2025 be quashed and set aside, and the Ld. CIT(E) be directed to grant permanent registration u/s 12AB of the IT Act, 1961, in the interest of justice.”

2. Succinctly stated, the assessee society was established with the primary objective of engaging in charitable activities such as relief of the poor, education, medical relief, advancement of other objects of general public utility.

3. On a perusal of the record, it transpires that the assessee trust was granted provisional registration in “Form 10AC” by the CPC, Bangalore on 04.09.2022, valid for three assessment years i.e. A.Y.

2023-24 to A.Y. 2025-26.

4. Subsequently,