IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1262 and 1263/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: -NA-

Amita Memorial Trust vs CIT (Exemption)

11 Himgiri 601, 6^th floor, Cumballa Hill Peddar Road MNTL TE Building, Mumbai-400026 Peddar Road Mumbai-400026 PAN: AAATA4232E Appellant Respondent Present for:

Appellant by : Shri K. Gopal & Ms Neha Paranjpe, Advocates Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 17.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 30.03.2026

O R D E R

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER These appeals filed by the assessee are arising out of the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai [CIT(E)] vide order nos. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1085262370(1) and ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1085262397(1) both, dated 28.01.2026 u/s 80G and 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. Grounds taken by the assessee are as under:

A. ITA No.1262/Mum/2026 “1) The learned CIT (Exemptions) has erred in law and in facts in rejecting the application seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

2) The learned CIT (Exemptions) has erred in law and in facts in stating that the appellant has violated the provision as prescribed under explanation (g) of Section 12AB (4) of the Act. Your appellant submits that no such violation has been made and thus registration under section 12AB be approved.

3) Your appellants further reserve the rights to add, amend or alter the aforesaid grounds of appeal as they may think fit by themselves or by their representatives.”

B. ITA No.1263/Mum/2026

1) “The learned CIT (Exemptions) has erred in law and in facts in holding the approval under section 80G of the Act without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

2) Your appellants further reserve the rights to add, amend or alter the aforesaid grounds of appeal as they may think fit by themselves or by their representatives.”

3. The entire controversy in the present appeals before us is in respect of absence of explicit clause in the Trust Deed regarding irrevocability and dissolution which according to the ld. CIT(E) renders the assessee trust liable for rejection of its registration u/s 12AB of the Act. There are two appeals. Appeal vide ITA no.1262/Mum/2026 is in respect of rejection of renewal of registration u/s 12AB sought by the assessee by filing an application in Form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. The other appeal in ITA no.1263/Mum/2026 is in respect of seeking approval u/s 80G (5)(ii) for which also, assessee had filed its Form 10AB.

3.1. In the proceedings conducted by the ld. CIT(E), assessee was required to demonstrate if its Trust Deed contains clause regarding irrevocability and dissolution for which it is contended that assessee trust is intended to exist permanently and will continue perpetually, therefore, no separate clause on irrevocability or dissolution is required in the Trust Deed. Ld. CIT(E) thus, observed that Trust Deed of the assessee does not contain clause regarding irrevocability and dissolution which does not give statutory safeguard to the Revenue to ensure that the assets of the assessee shall be applied solely towards charitable purposes and upon its dissolution, shall be transferred to another trust or institution having similar charitable objects as mandated under the provisions of the Act. According to him, it is explicitly mentioned in the statute itself that the benefit of tax exemption u/s 11 is restricted only to public charitable trusts or public religious trusts which are not revocable in nature. For this, he referred to the words “subject to provisions of section 60 to 63” in section 11. He also took note of the reply given by the assessee in point no.6 of Form 10AB where the question mentioned is “whether the Trust Deed contains clause that the trust is irrevocable?