Validity of Existing Section 12AB Registration Cannot Be Challenged During Renewal Proceedings: ITAT Mumbai

The transition from the erstwhile charitable trust registration regime to the modernized framework has introduced several procedural nuances for charitable institutions. A recurring issue in recent times is the approach adopted by revenue authorities when processing renewal applications for trusts that obtained their initial registrations exclusively under the new statutory framework.

In a significant judicial development, the Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) delivered a comprehensive ruling in the case of Chaturbhuja Mata Mai Seva Trust Vs CIT(Exemptions). The Tribunal adjudicated on whether a competent authority can collaterally invalidate an existing, operative registration under Section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 during renewal proceedings, merely because the assessee did not possess a registration certificate under the old regime prior to 01.04.2021.

This article provides an in-depth summary and legal analysis of the ITAT Mumbai order dated 02/07/2026, in ITA No. 3867/Mum/2026, concerning the Related Assessment Year 2027-28.

Factual Matrix of the Dispute

The assessee in the present matter, Chaturbhuja Mata Mai Seva Trust, is a public charitable entity formally constituted under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The foundational objects of the assessee are deeply rooted in social welfare, encompassing the organization of free medical camps with the aid of medical professionals and child specialists, disseminating education regarding hygiene and nutrition, advocating for gender equality and equal opportunities for women, establishing and maintaining old-age homes, and operating community halls as well as public libraries. These activities are positioned to fall squarely within the definition of charitable purposes under the Act, specifically targeting education, medical relief, and relief for the poor.

The Registration Timeline

The procedural history of the assessee's registration under the Income-tax Act, 1961 is crucial to understanding the genesis of the dispute:

  1. Provisional Registration: The assessee initially applied for and was successfully granted provisional registration under the newly introduced Section 12AB. This was issued via Form No. 10AC dated 27.05.2021, under Section 12A(1)(ac)(vi). The provisional registration was assigned Registration No. AACTC6372RE20206 and was valid for the period spanning from AY 2021-22 to AY 2023-24. The issuance of this certificate indicated that the competent authority had duly considered the application and the accompanying material on record at that time.
  2. Regular Registration: Following the provisional phase, the assessee was subsequently granted regular registration. This was also issued in Form No. 10AC dated 08.11.2021, but this time under Section 12A(1)(ac)(i). This regular registration carried the Unique Registration No. (URN) AACTC6372RE20212 and was valid for a period of five years, specifically from AY 2022-23 to AY 2026-27.
  3. Renewal Application: As the statutory validity of the regular registration was slated to expire at the conclusion of AY 2026-27, the assessee proactively initiated the renewal process. On 29.09.2025, the assessee filed an application in Form No. 10AB under Section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, seeking the mandatory renewal of its Section 12AB registration.

The Rejection by the CIT(Exemptions)