ITAT Jaipur Rules on Renewal of Section 12AB Registration and Section 80G Approval with Curable Deficiencies

1. Introduction

The Jaipur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Shri Radha Govind Goshala Samiti Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITA Nos: 423 and 424/JPR/2026, order dated 08/10/2026) has delivered an important ruling on the treatment of renewal applications under Section 12AB and Section 80G(5) where documentation is incomplete, and on the impact of State public trust laws on maintainability of appeals before the ITAT.

The Tribunal has:

  • Distinguished between procedural defects in applications and substantive ineligibility.
  • Clarified the relevance of State law compliance (e.g., Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959) in proceedings under Section 12AB.
  • Rejected the view that the CIT(E) can pronounce on the maintainability of an appeal against his own order before the ITAT.
  • Restored both the Section 12AB and Section 80G applications to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision, subject to the assessee’s cooperation.

This decision is particularly relevant for charitable institutions and societies dealing with renewal applications filed in Form No. 10AB under the new regime.

2. Factual Matrix

2.1 Existing registration and approvals

The assessee, a society, already enjoyed:

  • Registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Income Tax Act 1961, and
  • Approval under clause (i) of the first proviso to section 80G(5),

both of which had been granted through the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC).

2.2 Renewal applications in Form No. 10AB

For continuation under the new regime, the assessee filed:

  • Application in Form No. 10AB on 27.09.2025 seeking registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) (falling under section 12AB), and
  • Another Form No. 10AB on 29.09.2025 seeking renewal of approval under clause (ii) of the first proviso to section 80G(5).

Both applications were therefore renewal/continuation applications, not fresh registrations from scratch.

2.3 Deficiency notice and non-compliance

The CIT(E) issued a single deficiency letter dated 30.01.2026, fixing 04.02.2026 as the date for compliance in both matters. The assessee:

  • Did not file any reply or documents in response.
  • Did not seek extension or appear to explain the non-compliance.

No separate show cause notice proposing rejection on specific grounds was referred to in the orders.

2.4 Orders dated 11.02.2026

By two separate but connected orders both dated 11.02.2026 in Form No. 10AD, the CIT(E):

  • Rejected the Section 12AB registration application (ITA No. 423/JPR/2026), and
  • Rejected the Section 80G(5) approval application (ITA No. 424/JPR/2026) as a consequence.

Further, both orders noted that separate proceedings would be taken up for cancellation of the existing registration and approval; however, the orders under appeal themselves dealt only with renewal refusal, not cancellation of existing benefits.

Crucially, neither order contained any finding about:

  • The charitable nature of the objects, or
  • The genuineness of the activities of the assessee.

3. Grounds on Which the CIT(E) Rejected the Applications

3.1 Rejection of Section 12AB registration application

For ITA No. 423/JPR/2026, the CIT(E) cited two reasons:

  1. Incomplete Form No. 10AB
    The application was treated as incomplete because the assessee did not upload/submit:

    • Copies of the earlier registration under section 12AA and approval under section 80G (original pre-new-regime orders on the basis of which CPC had issued the current registration/approval), and
    • A note on the activities of the society.

  2. Non-registration under Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959
    The CIT(E) stated that the assessee was not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 and relied on this aspect, placing reliance on New Noble Educational Society v. CCIT [2022] 448 ITR 594 (SC) to underline the importance of compliance with other applicable laws.

3.2 Rejection of Section 80G approval application

For ITA No. 424/JPR/2026, the sole basis of rejection was:

  • Approval under section 80G cannot be granted unless the assessee has registration under section 12AB;
  • Since the Section 12AB application was rejected on the same day, the Section 80G(5) application was also rejected, merely echoing the earlier grounds.

Thus, the second rejection was purely consequential; no independent examination of Section 80G-specific conditions was carried out.

4.