Second Form 10AB Application Maintainable; CIT(E) Cannot Reject Registration Solely Because Earlier Rejection Was Not Challenged

Smt. Venkatalakshmamma Venkatachala Vidhya Bharathi Education Trust Vs CIT (ITAT Bangalore)

Second Form 10AB Application Maintainable; CIT(E) Cannot Reject Registration Solely Because Earlier Rejection Was Not Challenged

The Bangalore ITAT held that there is no bar under the Income-tax Act preventing a trust from filing a second application for registration under section 12AB, merely because an earlier application had been rejected and such rejection was not challenged before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) rejecting the trust’s fresh application for registration.

The assessee-trust, engaged in running pre-nursery, primary and high schools as well as a PU college, had filed a fresh application in Form 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB. The CIT(E) rejected the application on two grounds: first, that an earlier application had already been rejected on 29.01.2025 and the assessee had not challenged that order; and secondly, that the trust had allegedly failed to respond to notices and furnish the required details.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee demonstrated that it had in fact furnished the required documents on multiple dates and had also filed detailed written submissions, supported by acknowledgements evidencing such filing. The Tribunal found that the CIT(E)’s observation that no reply or written submissions had been filed was factually incorrect.

The Tribunal further observed that the Revenue could not dispute the genuineness of the trust’s educational activities. More importantly, it held that the Act does not contain any provision prohibiting a trust from making a fresh application for registration merely because an earlier rejection order was not appealed against. Therefore, rejection of the application on this ground was unsustainable.

Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the rejection order and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(E) with a direction to examine the application on merits after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE

This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(E) dated 18/12/2025 in which the application filed by the assessee in form 10AB for registration u/s. 12AB was rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust and established in the year 2007. The assessee trust runs pre-nursery, primary and high school and also a PU college. The assessee filed an application on 22/09/2025 for the grant of registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. The assessee also filed the various details called for by the AO during the hearings on 14/11/2025 and 17/11/2025. The assessee also filed the written submissions on 25/11/2025 through online as well as by physical form. The Ld.CIT(E) had rejected the said application on the ground that the earlier application filed by the assessee was rejected on 29/01/2025 which was not challenged by the assessee and therefore the second application is not maintainable and also for the reason that the assessee had not submitted any reply to the show cause notice issued by him.

3. As against the said rejection order, the present appeal has been filed by the assessee.

4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had furnished the various details on 14/11/2025 and 17/11/2025 and also filed their written submissions on 25/11/2025 and also enclosed the acknowledgment for having filed the said written submissions and submitted that the order of the Ld.CIT(E) is not correct in view of the non-consideration of the documents as well as the written submissions. The Ld.AR further submitted that there is no prohibition under the Act to file a second application before the Ld.CIT(E) and therefore the said ground for rejecting the application is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee trust is doing genuine charitable activities and without considering the said genuineness the rejection of the application on flimsy grounds is liable to be set aside.

5. The Ld.DR submitted that the assessee had not challenged the earlier rejection order before this Tribunal and therefore the order passed by the Ld.CIT(E) rejecting the second application is in order.

6. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. It is not in dispute that the assessee is a charitable organization running various schools and college. There is no dispute about the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust. Further, the assessee had also furnished the various documents in support of their second application and also filed their written submissions which were evidenced from the acknowledgement now produced by the assessee. The reasons stated by the Ld.CIT(E) while rejecting the application was that the assessee had not furnished the various details and also not filed their written submissions and the assessee could not file the second application without challenging the earlier rejection order. As stated earlier, the assessee had furnished the details on two dates and also filed their written submissions on 25/11/2025. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(E) is not correct in stating that the assessee had not responded and also not filed their written submissions. The another reason stated by the Ld.CIT(E) that the assessee’s earlier application was rejected but the same was not challenged before the Tribunal and therefore the second application could not be entertained is also not correct since there is no such restriction made in the provisions. There is no bar in the Act that the assessee cannot move a second application without challenging the earlier rejection order.

8. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the rejection order passed by the Ld.CIT(E) is not sustainable and therefore we are setting aside the said order and remit this issue to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) to decide the application filed by the assessee on merits after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16^th June, 2026.