SHREE ZALAWAD JAIN SAMAJ,SURAT vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD
Facts
The assessee filed applications for registration under section 80G(5) which were rejected by the CIT(Exemption). There was a significant delay in filing the appeals against these rejection orders before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay to technical faults and missed opportunities for hearings before the CIT(E).
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the delay and the ex-parte nature of the orders passed by the CIT(E). While imposing a cost of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee, the Tribunal set aside the rejection orders and remanded the matters back to the CIT(E) to provide one more opportunity for the assessee to present their case and obtain registration.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing appeals and set aside ex-parte rejection orders for registration under section 80G(5) by providing another opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
80G(5), Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI T.R.SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These two appeals are filed by the assessee as against two separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short “CIT(E)”] dated 28/02/2025 and 20/09/2025 rejecting the applications filed for registration u/s.80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 275 days in filing the appeal in ITA No.266/Ahd/2026. The assessee, by way of a notirized affidavit, explained that the first application for registration u/s.80G was rejected on 28/02/2025. Thereafter,
ITA No.266/Ahd/2026 & ITA No.2142/Ahd/2025 Shree Zalawad Jain Samaj vs. The CIT(E) - 2 -
the assessee filed another application before the CIT(E) which was also rejected on 20/09/2025. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals against both the rejection orders which has resulted in a delay of 275 days, thereby requested to condone the delay.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee has fairly admitted that in the first rejection order, the CIT(E) has given two opportunities of hearing on 27/01/2025 and 12/02/2025 which were not responded by the assessee due to technical fault which has resulted in passing the ex-parte rejection order. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded to set aside the ex-parte orders by giving one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee- trust, so that all necessary evidences will be filed before the CIT(E) for granting registration u/s.80G of the Act.
The Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue submitted that necessary costs be imposed for setting aside the ex-parte orders.
Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Considering the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal of 275 days and ex-parte orders before the CIT(E), we hereby impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Department within two weeks on receipt of copy of this order and produce the cost paid challan before the CIT(E), so that one more opportunity be given to the assessee-trust for registration u/s80G of the Act. Accordingly, we set aside the matters to the file of CIT(E) subject to fulfilment
ITA No.266/Ahd/2026 & ITA No.2142/Ahd/2025 Shree Zalawad Jain Samaj vs. The CIT(E) - 3 -
of above conditions. Needless to say that the assessee should co- operate by filing all necessary documents before CIT(E) for granting registration u/s.80G of the Act.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 27/03/2026
Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 27/03/2026
T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(E)-Ahmedabad-380 015 5. The / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, स�ािपत �ित //True Copy//
(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Ahmedabad
