9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er for making application under Clause (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. As observed above, for making application for final registration under Clause (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, the institution must have been provisionally registered either under Clause (i) or Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. Therefore, after grant of provisional approval, the application cannot be rejected that the institution had already commenced its activities even prior to grant of provisional registration. Under such circumstances, the date of commencement of activity will be counted when an activity is undertaken after the grant of provisional registration either under Clause (i) or Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. In the case in hand, the assessee admittedly has applied for final registration after grant of provisional registration under Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act and therefore, the application filed by the assessee is within limitation period. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of Vivekananda Mission Asram [ 2023 (12) TMI 1298 - ITAT KOLKATA] and in the case of West Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime limit prescribed for making an application for final approval u/s 80G of the Act was at least six months prior to the expiry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of the commencement of its activities, whichever is earlier. He observed that the assessee had already commenced its activities since long and since the time period for making application mentioned in Clause (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act had already expired, therefore, the assessee could not be granted final registration u/s 80G(5) of the Act. He also observed that vide CBDT Circular No. 18/2022 the date for submitting the application for final approval was extended up to 30.09.2022. However, the fresh application by the assessee was filed on 10.02.2023 which was after the extended date of 30.09.2022. He, therefore, rejected the application of the assessee for final approval u/s 80G of the Act. 4. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the record. Before proceeding further, it will be relevant to reproduce here the relevant provisions of section 80G(5) of the Act: 80G(5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was earlier granted to such institution or fund; (b) clause (iii) of the first proviso, from the first of the assessment years for which such institution or fund was provisionally approved; (c) in any other case, from the assessment year immediately following the financial year in which such application is made. 5. A perusal of the above provisions would reveal that the institutions which stood already approved u/s 80G(5)(vi) on the date of Amendment brought to section 80G of the Act by Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 have to re-apply for fresh registration under Clause (i) to the First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act and those institutions have to be granted provisional registration for five years by the ld. CIT(Exemption) without any enquiry. The prescribed date for final application for approval under Clause (i) to the First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act was stipulated as three months from 1st Day of April 2022. However, the CBDT from time to time extended the date for filing of the said application under Clause (i) to the First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act and finally vide Circular No.6 of 2023 dated 24.05. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 80G(5) of the Act, has held as under: 6. So far as the observation of the ld. CIT(E) that the assessee had already commenced its activities since long and that as per Clause (iii) of 1st Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, the application for final registration was to be filed within six months from the commencement of its activities and therefore, the application of the assessee for final registration was time-barred, is concerned, we note that the issue has already been discussed and adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of West Bengal Welfare Society vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata vide order dated 13.09.23 [one of us i.e. the Judicial Member herein, being the author of the said order], wherein, it has been held that the assessee, who has been granted provisional registration, is eligible to apply for final registration irrespective of the fact that the assessee had already commenced its activity even prior to the date of grant of provisional approval. The relevant part of the order of the Coordinate Bench is reproduced as under: 6. We note that the ld. CIT(E) has misconstrued the aforesaid proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. As per the provision, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act, the institution must have been provisionally registered either under Clause (i) or Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. Therefore, after grant of provisional approval, the application cannot be rejected that the institution had already commenced its activities even prior to grant of provisional registration. Under such circumstances, the date of commencement of activity will be counted when an activity is undertaken after the grant of provisional registration either under Clause (i) or Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. In the case in hand, the assessee admittedly has applied for final registration after grant of provisional registration under Clause (iv) to First Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act and therefore, the application filed by the assessee is within limitation period. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vivekananda Mission Asram vs. CIT (supra) and in the case of West Bengal Welfare Society vs. CIT(Exemption) (supra). Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(Exemption) is set aside and the ld. CIT(Exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
