Srinivasan Charitable And Educational Trust Vs PCIT (ITAT Chennai)
Chennai ITAT Restores 12AB & 80G Renewal Applications: Once Cancellation of Trust Registration Is Quashed, Foundation for Rejecting Renewal Ceases to Exist
In Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust v. PCIT (Central)-2, ITA Nos. 2330 & 2331/Chny/2026 (AY 2025-26), order dated 19.08.2026, the Chennai ITAT considered rejection of the Trust’s applications for continuation/renewal of registration under Section 12AB and approval under Section 80G. The Trust had originally obtained registration under Section 12AA on 18.04.2007 and subsequently registration under the new regime on 24.09.2021, valid from AY 2022-23 to AY 2026-27.
The Trust applied in Form 10AB on 26.09.2025 for continuation of registration. The PCIT rejected the application because the original Section 12AA registration had meanwhile been cancelled with effect from AY 2012-13 onwards. Consequently, according to the PCIT, the registration granted in 2021 also became non-existent for want of a valid underlying registration, leaving nothing capable of being renewed or extended.
However, a crucial subsequent development changed the position. In an earlier appeal of the same Trust, the Chennai ITAT by order dated 15.07.2026 in ITA No. 3318/Chny/2025 had quashed the cancellation of registration and restored the Trust’s Section 12A/12AB registration. The Tribunal had held that registration could not be cancelled merely on allegations of collection of capitation fees from a few students based on loose sheets, when viewed holistically the Trust’s activities were genuine and in accordance with its objects. Any addition arising from seized material could instead be dealt with in assessment proceedings.
In the present proceedings, the ITAT therefore held that the very foundation on which the PCIT rejected the renewal application had ceased to exist. Once the earlier cancellation was quashed and the registration restored, the PCIT could no longer reject Form 10AB merely on the premise that there was no subsisting registration capable of renewal.
The Tribunal accordingly set aside the rejection and restored the Section 12AB application to the PCIT for fresh consideration on merits, taking into account the restored registration and the other statutory requirements. Importantly, the ITAT did not itself grant renewal, but directed the PCIT to reconsider the application after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Since the rejection of Section 80G approval was consequential to the absence of valid Section 12A/12AB registration, that rejection was also set aside and remanded to the PCIT for fresh consideration. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
