SHREE TERGAM LAUVA PATIDAR SEVA SAMAJ,DEHGAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXMEPTION, AHMEDABAD

The Assessee has taken the following ground of appeal:- “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application filed by the Appellant in Form No. 10AB under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The learned CIT(E) failed to appreciate that the objects of the Appellant Trust are wholly charitable and educational in nature and satisfy the conditions prescribed under the Act.

The learned CIT(E) erred in holding that the activities of the Appellant Trust were not genuine and/or satisfactory despite adequate documentary evidence placed on record.

The learned CIT(E) failed to properly appreciate and consider the submissions, documents and explanations furnished by the Appellant during the course of proceedings.

The impugned order has been passed without proper appreciation of facts and in violation of the principles of natural justice, as no ample opportunity is given for compliance, in spite of adjournment sought before rejecting the order..

The learned CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application and no liberal approach extended as per CBDT guidelines or as per case laws decided by Ld. ITAT or H'ble Courts.

The learned CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application on technical and procedural grounds without appreciating the substantial compliance made by the Appellant.

The order passed by the learned CIT(E) is bad in law, arbitrary, unjustified and liable to be quashed.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”

The facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust and had applied for registration under Form No.10AB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the I.T Act, 1961, since the assessee-trust remained non-compliant and failed to submit/explain genuineness of the activities of the Trust.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.

At the outset, we find that notices were issued from time to time to furnish details/documents as called for. The Ld.CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee on the ground that that the assessee-trust has neither filed any submission nor sought any adjournment. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel prayed that given an opportunity, the same would be apprised to the Ld.CIT(E). Ld. CIT(DR) argued that the assessee-trust needs to furnish requisite details/explanations and submissions before the Ld. CIT(E). Having considered the facts on record, we hold that interests of justice would be well served by remanding the matter to the Ld. CIT(E) for consideration of the application afresh and to pass an order by taking into consideration the submissions /explanations submitted by the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Now coming to ITA No. 2097/Ahd/2026 (Vanvasi Utkarsh Mandal), ITA No. 2079/Ahd/2026 (Border Development Trust), ITA No. 2060/Ahd/2026 (Shri Vadgam Taluka Anjanakelvani Mandal), ITA No. 1660/Ahd/2026 (Purbasha Cultural Association), ITA No. 2102/Ahd/2026 (Shree Tergam Lauva Patidar Seva Samaj), we find that the facts and issues involved in these appeals are identical to those involved in ITA No. 2269/Ahd/2026 (Shital Chhaya Charitable Trust). Therefore, the findings and decision rendered in ITA No. 2269/Ahd/2026 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the aforesaid appeals also. Accordingly, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes on the same terms.

In the combined results, all the appeal filed by the assessee’s are allowed for statistical purposes.

""थ"/ The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु"/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु"(अपील) /The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय"ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद/ DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड"फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायकपंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.