Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune
Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi ... vs Cit (Exemption), Pune on 5 March, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES "B", PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील स.ं / ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025
Assessment Year : 2022-23
Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Vs. CIT (Exemption),
Sanstha, Pune
1, Behind Kalaram Mandir,
Ward No.7, Shrirampur,
Dist. Ahilyanagar 413709
Maharashtra
PAN : AAVTS5324G
Appellant Respondent
Appellant by : Shri Prasad Bhandari
(Virtual)
Respondent by : Shri Amit Bobde
Date of hearing : 12.02.2026
Date of pronouncement : 05.03.2026
आदे श / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against the orders dated 30.09.2024 and 13.11.2024 framed by ld.CIT (Exemption), Pune denying applications for grant of regular registration u/s.12AA and approval u/s.80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act')
2. Registry has pointed out that there is delay of 106 days in filing of the appeals before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the delay. After going through the averments made in the affidavit giving rise to the delay, we are satisfied that due to 'reasonable cause' assessee was prevented to file the appeals in time. We find that delay is not intentional and assessee society has not gained anything by filing the appeals with delay. We therefore taking justice 2 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha oriented approach and in light of judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 106 days before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication.
3. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that regular registration u/s.12A of the Act has been granted to the assessee on 24.09.2021. Inspite of the fact that the assessee was not having any registration prior to 01.04.2021 and that the assessee got regular registration on 24.09.2021 assessee again filed renewal application on 02.10.2022 but the same was rejected on 24.04.2023 for statistical purposes. Again the assessee on the misguidance of the Consultant applied for regular registration on 31.03.2024 but the same has again been rejected on two grounds, firstly that the assessee has not taken provisional registration and secondly for the loans taken from Trustees assessee has not obtained approval from the Charity Commissioner as provided u/s.36A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.
4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that admittedly the assessee was first required to take provisional registration and then should have applied for regular registration but then ld.CIT(Exemption) has already granted regular registration vide order dated 24.09.2021 and the assessee was not required to make further application because the registration was valid upto A.Y. 2026-27. So far as the requirement of permission from the Charity Commissioner is concerned, he submitted that the small loans have been taken from the relatives of the 3 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha Trustee. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench in the case of Arham Foundation Vs. CIT (Exemption) - ITA Nos. 1584 and 1585/PUN/2025 order dated 29.10.2025.
5. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(Exemption).
6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessee is aggrieved with the rejection of application for regular registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act as well as application for approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act. We observe that the assessee has narrated the facts in the form of an Affidavit (relevant extract) and the same reads as under :
"1. That our society has been assessed to Income Tax with PAN AAVTS5324G.
2. That in our case, the application for regular registration under section 12A had been made on 20.08.2021 without having the registration prior to 01.04.2021. The said application had been made inadvertently due to lack of knowledge and lack of proper advice at our rural place.
3. That, we got the regular registration vide order of Ld. CIT(E)- Pune dated 24.09.2021. The copy of the same is attached herewith as per Annexure - 1. Again, due to lack of knowledge we have applied for renewal of regular registration on 02.10.2022 which was not needed. The said application has been rejected by the Ld. CIT(E)- Pune for statistical purposes vide order dated 24.04.2023. The copy of the same is attached herewith as per Annexure-2.
4. That, again due to the misguidance of the consultant we have applied for regular registration on 31.03.2024 in which the Ld. CIT(E) - Pune realized that the regular registration granted on 24.09.2021 was wrongly granted in the absence of registration under section 12A prior to 01.04.2021. Therefore, he rejected the application and also cancelled the regular registration granted on 30.09.2024.4
ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha
5. That, since, our regular registration has been cancelled, the Ld. CIT(E) - Pune rejected our application for approval under section 80G vide order dated 13.11.2024."
7. On going through the contents of the affidavit given by the President of the society and also taking note of Form No.10AC for the regular registration u/s.12A(1)ac)(i) issued by ld.CIT(Exemption), we note that firstly the assessee which was not having regular registration u/s.12A prior to 01.04.2021 had made an application for regular registration after 01.04.2021 without first obtaining provisional registration. Due to this mistake, ld.CIT(Exemption) had no occasion to examine the genuineness of the activities carried out by the assessee. However, the registration has been granted for A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27. In the fresh application for regular registration filed on 31.03.2023, ld.CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application only on two grounds firstly that the original registration has been obtained by mentioning wrong clause and that the registration granted on 24.09.2021 is basically a provisional registration and the same deserves to be cancelled. Secondly for the loans taken from the Trustees assessee has not obtained the permission u/s.36A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act. Ld.CIT(Exemption) has not doubted the nature of chartable activities carried out by the assesssee.
8. So far as the permission from Charity Commissioner is concerned, we note that the assessee has taken small loans from the Trustee and no encumbrance has been created on the property of the trust. Under similar set of facts and circumstances, this Tribunal in the case of Arham Foundation 5 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha Vs. CIT (Exemption) (supra) has dealt with this issue and following judicial precedents has observed as under :
"5. We have heard both the parties and perused the record. Assessee has filed copy of e-proceeding acknowledgment at page no.67, 68, 69 and 70 of the paper book, which gives list of documents filed by Assessee before the ld.CIT(E).
5.1 On perusal of the paper book filed by the Assessee, it is observed that Assessee is running following educational institutes :
➢ Arham School and Junior College ➢ Arham College of Arts and Commerce ➢ Arham International Institute of Information Security ➢ Arham Law College 5.2 All the above educational institutes are duly approved by the Competent Authority. Copies of the approval have also been filed by the Assessee in the paper book. These facts have not been challenged by ld.CIT(E) or ld.DR for the Revenue.
5.3 Thus, it is an admitted fact that Assessee Trust is running duly approved Educational Institutes. It is also an admitted fact that Assessee is registered with the Charity Commissioner and has submitted Audited Financials before the Charity Commissioner as per Maharashtra Public Trust Act.
5.4 As per Section 2(15) of the Act, Charitable Purpose includes Education. Thus, Assessee's activities are as per the definition of Section 2(15) of the Act. This fact has not been doubted by ld.CIT(E).
5.5 On perusal of the order of ld.CIT(E), it is noted that ld.CIT(E) has rejected Assessee's application for grant of registration u/s.12A r.w.s 12AB of the Act, only on one ground that Assessee had taken certain loans/advances without obtaining prior permission of Charity Commissioner. Therefore, ld.CIT(E) held that Assessee has violated provisions of Section 36A of Maharashtra Public Trust Act.
5.6 It is the submission of Ld.AR that the Trustees have provided certain advances to the Trust as and when required, which were utilized by the Trust for the purpose of the objects of the Trust.
5.7 We find Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ashok Shreekrishna Beharay vs. Joint Charity Commissioner in Writ Petition No.8180 of 2025 order dated 16.10.2025 has observed as under :
"17. The aforesaid restriction in the matter of borrowing is necessary because, though the property of the public trust vests in the trustees, yet, they are not the owners of the trust property.
The property vests in them for the purpose of discharge of the 6 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha object of the Trust or for the benefits of the beneficiaries. It is, therefore, imperative that the trustees of a public trust do not have unfettered power to borrow the money on the credit of the property of the Trust and thereby encumber the property of the Trust. The legislature, therefore, considered it imperative to put restrictions in the matter of borrowing for the purpose or on behalf of Trust and vest authority in the Charity Commissioner to accord sanction for such borrowing as the Charity Commissioner exercises parens petrie jurisdiction."
5.8 In the instant case we find the Trustees have given advances to the Trust without creating any encumbrances on property of the Trust. Thus, the advances are unsecured. Further it is an undisputed fact that the advances have been used for the purpose of the objects of the trust.
5.9 We find an identical issued had come up before the Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Vyankanath Maharaj Vs. ITO in ITA No.398/NAG/2024 has held as under :
"12. We have given our thoughtful submissions to the facts and have dispassionately heard all the arguments. The procedural breach is venial and not material for the purpose of achieving its objects. Moreover, the loan has not been taken by way of encumbrance of assets from any particular deficiency. The learned CIT(E) has been given onerous responsibility to grant registration under section 12AB of the Act and registration and cancellation can be proceeded with only after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The reply of the Trust that loan has been subsequently repaid has been glossed over and a mere procedural irregularity, which is curable defect has been amplified to deny registration. Moreover, once provisional registration has been granted under section 12AA, under section 12AB(4) of the Act, the learned CIT(E) is perfectly empowered to cancel such registration, if specified violation has taken place. Clause (f) of Explanation clearly lays down the requirement of order; direction or decree, holding such non-compliance has remained undisputed or has attained finality. Such circumstances are non-existent in this case. Accordingly, the provisional registration needs to be converted to final registration. We direct accordingly. Consequent upon our directions based on the findings cited supra, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(E) by allowing all the grounds raised by the assessee."
5.10 We find Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Baramati Vipassana Samiti(supra) has directed ld.CIT(E) to grant registration u/s.12A of the Act to the Trust by observing as under :
"8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. On perusal of the order under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act, it is observed that ld.CIT(E) has rejected assessee's application only one ground i.e. Assessee had not taken prior permission of Charity Commissioner before taking 7 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha Loan of Rs.1,15,800/-. Ld.CIT(E) was of the opinion that at least post-facto permission should have been taken. It is noted that ld.CIT(E) has not discussed about the activities of the Assessee, it means ld.CIT(E) has accepted that activities of the assessee are charitable in nature. We have perused the paper book filed by the assessee. It is observed that assessee has conducted various training courses for Vipasana Training which is a Ancient Meditation Technique. We have also perused the trust deed and noted that following are the objects of the trust :
i) To establish and operate centres and secular educational institutes for teaching of and training in Vipassana as taught by S.N.Goenkaji in the Tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin; open to all irrespective of caste, creed, gender, religion or nationality.
ii) To acquire lands and buildings for the purposes of establishing centers and institutes;
iii) To Hold/Host Vipassana courses, arrange lectures, discourses and seminars for teaching of and add educational training in Vipassana; without taking any fees or charges for Teaching, and for the standard Lodging & boarding facilities provided by the center.
iv) To otherwise promote and further the spread of the awareness and practice of Vipassana Meditation in the region of the Trust and throughout the world.
v) The trust shall not carry on any Activiti for earning profit.
However, if any income is generated out of/on account of trust activities/properties the same will be solely applied / utilized in furtherance of trust objects. The beneficiaries are public at large and not any specific community/individuals.
8.1 Thus, we are of the opinion that objects and activities of the trust are charitable in nature as defined in Section 2(15) of the Act. As far as the issue of obtaining a meagre loan of Rs.1,15,800/- is concerned, it is observed that assessee had submitted PAN and Aadhar of the Lenders. The ld.CIT(E) has not doubted the genuineness of the loan. During the proceedings, a letter has been submitted which states that assessee has applied for post-facto permission from Charity Commissioner with reference to the said loan. Thus, as stated by ld.CIT(E) in his order, the assessee has applied for post-facto permission. It is observed that on identical facts, ITAT Nagpur in the case of Prerana Samajik Sanskrutik Bahuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha vs CIT(E) in ITA No.376/NAG/2023 has allowed the assessee's appeal and directed ld.CIT(E) to grant registration under section 12A of the Act. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that Assessee is eligible for registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the ld.CIT(E) to grant registration u/s.12A of the Act to the assessee. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
8ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha
9. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2642/PUN/2024 is allowed."
5.11 We find the provisions of Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is reproduced here as under :
"12AB. (1) The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, on receipt of an application made under clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, shall,--
(a) where the application is made under sub-clause (i) of the said clause, pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years;
(b) where the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause
(iii) or sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) 66[or item (B) of sub-clause
(vi)] of the said clause,--
(i) call for such documents or information from the trust or institution or make such inquiries as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about--
(A) the genuineness of activities of the trust or institution; and (B) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects;
(ii) after satisfying himself about the objects of the trust or institution and the genuineness of its activities under item (A) and compliance of the requirements under item (B), of sub-clause (i),--
(A) pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years; or"
5.12 Thus, as per provisions of Section 12AB(1), ld.CIT(E) has to verify only the genuineness of the activities of the Trust and compliance of such requirements of any other law by the Trust as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects.
5.13 In this context, in the case of the Assessee-Arham Foundation, objects and activities of the Assessee Trust had not been doubted by the ld.CIT(E). We have already noted that Arham Foundation is running educational institutions. Thus, objects of the Assessee and Activities of the Assessee are charitable in nature. Therefore, there is no doubt about the genuineness of the activities of the Assessee Trust.
5.14 Now, coming to the second condition, compliance of such requirement of any other law as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. In this case, advances taken from Trustee's have been used for objects of the Trust.
9ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha 5.15 As mentioned earlier, no encumbrances have been created on the property by the impugned loans/advances given by Trustee. In these facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court cited(supra) and the decision of ITAT, we are of the considered opinion that the non-obtaining of prior permission of Charity Commissioner for impugned advances/loans is a procedural lapse and is not a violation of law as envisaged in Section 12AB(1)(b)(B) of the Act. Therefore, we are satisfied that Assessee's objects are charitable in nature and activities are also charitable in nature as defined in Section 2(15) of the Act.
5.16 In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that Assessee is eligible for registration u/s.12A r.w.s 12AB of the Act. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of Ld.CIT(E) and direct him to grant registration u/s.12A r.w.s 12AB of the Act.
6. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed."
9. In light of the above decision and also considering the facts of the case that only short term loans have been obtained and there is no encumbrance on the property of the assessee trust and obtaining permission from the Charity Commissioner is a procedural lapse and cannot be termed as violation of law as envisaged u/s.12AB(1)(b) of the Act. Now since the assessee has successfully demonstrated that assessee trust has been formed for the purpose of carrying out the charitable activities as provided u/s.2(15) of the Act and duly supported by the documents exhibiting such activities, we hold that the assessee deserves to be granted registration u/s.12A r.w.s.12AB of the Act. Further, since assessee has inadvertently applied for the registration u/s.12A on 20.08.2021 and ld.CIT(Exemption) has granted regular registration on 24.09.2021, we therefore deem it appropriate to hold that the said regular registration u/s.12A of the Act granted on 24.09.2021 should remain effective till A.Y. 2026-
27. Since granting approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act is consequential, the same should also remain effective till A.Y. 10 ITA Nos.1141 and 1142/PUN/2025 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Sanstha 2026-27. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in both the appeals are allowed.
10. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced on this 05th day of March, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 05th March, 2026. Satish आदे श की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant.
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, "B" बेंच, पण ु े / DR, ITAT, "B" Bench, Pune.
5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File.
आिे श नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.