Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

August 2026

Where CIT(E) granted registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G by following the binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, imposition of conditions making such registration, approval and all consequential benefits subject to the outcome of a proposed challenge before the Supreme Court was unjustified.

By Jagdish T Punjabi, Chartered Accountant Devendra Jain & Aditya Bhatt, Advocates
Reading Time 5 mins

41. (2026) 187 taxmann.com 1010 (Mum Trib)

Keshavlal Vajechand Kapadia Charity Trust v. CIT(E)

A.Ys.: 2027-28 to 2031-32 Date of Order : 24.06.2026

Sections: 12AB, 80G

Where CIT(E) granted registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G by following the binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, imposition of conditions making such registration, approval and all consequential benefits subject to the outcome of a proposed challenge before the Supreme Court was unjustified.

FACTS

The assessee trust had applied for renewal of registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G. CIT(E), by separate orders dated 14.02.2026, rejected both applications primarily on the ground that the trust deed did not contain an express clause declaring the trust irrevocable.

Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeals before ITAT. During pendency of the appeals, the Bombay High Court, in the case of Chamber of Tax Consultants v. CIT (Exemptions) [2026] 184 taxmann.com 374 (Bombay), held that a public charitable trust is presumed to be irrevocable by operation of law unless the trust

Read More
Download PDF

You May Also Like

Where the assessee initially filed Form No. 10AB under an incorrect clause and thereafter filed a fresh application under the correct clause during registration proceedings, such filing was a curative step and continuation of the original proceedings and rejection of registration on the ground that the corrected application was time-barred was not justified.

Sec. 37(1) – Business expenditure – Disallowance of ‘discount/claim/shortage/deduction’ expenses made solely on proportionate comparison with preceding year without enquiry into supporting details or defects in books – Not sustainable – Matter restored for de novo assessment Sec. 250(6) – Commissioner (Appeals) – Ex parte dismissal of appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating issues on merits, without specifying points for determination, decision thereon and reasons – Order unsustainable and liable to be set aside.