SHREE RAVIPARVATI HIRAMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

These are two appeals filed by the same Assessee-Trust against two separate Orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’] denying registration under Section 12A and approval under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’].

We would first take up ITA No. 930/AHD/2026. By way the said appeal the Assessee has challenged the Order, dated 08/03/2026, passed by Learned CIT(E) whereby the application filed by the Assessee in Form

The Assessee has raised the following grounds in the present appeal: “1). That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT (Exemption) has grievously erred in not granting sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing and in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12A of the Act, vide ex-parte order. 2). That on facts and in law, the application made u/s 12A of the Act ought to have been granted by learned CIT (Exemption) as prayed for. 3). The appellant craves liberty to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal.”

The relevant facts in brief are that the application filed by the Assessee in Form No.10AB for registration of the Assessee-Trust under Section 12A of the Act was rejected by the Learned CIT(E) on the ground that the Assessee had failed to submit the requisite details/documents to establish the genuineness of the charitable activities and the conduct of operations of the Assessee-Trust in consonance with its objects.

Aggrieved by the above rejection order passed by the Learned CIT(E), the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 2 above.

The Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee, at the outset, sought another opportunity to make out a case for grant of registration. It was submitted that the Assessee that a reasonable opportunity of being heard was not granted to the Assessee as only one notice of hearing was issued.

Per Contra, the Learned Departmental Representative submitted that the Assessee had neither filed relevant documents/details along with the application nor did the Assessee come forward to file the same in response to notice issued by the Learned CIT(E). Therefore, there was no infirmity in the order passed by the Learned CIT(E).

We have considered the rival contentions and have perused the material available on record. We note that the Learned CIT(E) had rejected the application after affording opportunity to the Assessee on 22/02/2026. The Assessee has contended that the documents/details, though available, could not be filed before the Learned CIT(E) since reasonable opportunity of being heard was not granted to the Assessee. Given the aforesaid, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met in case another opportunity is granted to the Assessee to furnish the relevant documents/details/submissions for consideration of the Learned CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the application filed by the Assessee back to the file of the Learned CIT(E) with the directions to adjudicate the said application afresh after taking into consideration the relevant documents/details/submission filed by the Assessee and after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

In the result, the present appeal (ITA No. 930/AHD/2026) preferred by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

We would next take up ITA No. 931/AHD/2026 preferred by the Assessee challenging the Order, dated 1/06/2026, passed by Learned CIT(E) whereby the application filed by the Assessee in Form No. 10AB for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act was rejected.

The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No.931/AHD/2026 :

We have heard both the sides and have perused the material on record.

It is apparent that the application filed by the Assessee for seeking approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act was dismissed by the Learned CIT(E) on the ground that the Assessee-Trust did not hold any registration under Section 12A/12AB of the Act. We have, hereinabove, directed the Learned CIT(E) to consider the application filed by the Assessee for seeking registration under Section 12A of the Act afresh. Therefore, we deem it appropriate and in the interest of justice to we set aside the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(E) and restore the application filed by the Assessee seeking approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act back to the file of the Learned CIT(E) with the Act; relevant documents/details/submission filed by the Assessee in support of application seeking registration under Section 80G(5) of the Act and after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

In terms of above, Ground No.1 to 3 raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes without returning any findings on merits.

In the result, the present appeal (ITA No. 931/AHD/2026) preferred by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, both appeals the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

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