WISDOM EDUCATION AND WELFARE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2533/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 20264 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the order of the CIT(E). The assessee was granted one more opportunity to comply with the requirements before the CIT(E).

What were the facts?

The assessee trust applied for approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application due to non-compliance with notices and failure to provide requested details.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was granted sufficient opportunity to comply with the CIT(E)'s notices and whether the rejection of the 80G approval application was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Hearing: 05.05.2026Pronounced: 07.05.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’], dated 21.11.2024 in the proceeding u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

There was delay of 320 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee had filed a condonation application. It has been explained by Shri Irfan Aiyub Patel, the trustee of the assessee trust, that the assessee was not aware of the order of Ld. CIT(E) rejecting the application of the assessee. The trustees were also not conversant with checking the status of the

ITA No. 2533/Ahd/2025 Wisdom Education and welfare trust Vs. CIT(E) 2 appeal on the online portal of the Department. The assessee came to know about the rejection of the application by the CIT(E) only when similar rejection in respect of another trust was brought to notice. Thereafter, the status had checked by the CA and on finding that the application was rejected, the present appeal was filed and in the process there was delay of 320 days. It is submitted that the delay was not intentional but due to lack of knowledge about the order of Ld. CIT(E). Considering the explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing of this application is condoned.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an application for approval of the Trust u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(E) had called for certain details vide notices dated 10.09.2024 and 24.10.2024, which were not complied. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application of the assessee and the provisional approval granted earlier was also cancelled.

4.

Aggrieved with order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this 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 approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act, vide ex- parte order. 2. That on facts and in law, the application made u/s 80G(5)(iii) 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.

ITA No. 2533/Ahd/2025 Wisdom Education and welfare trust Vs. CIT(E) 3 5. Shri Mehul K. Patel, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application only on the ground that no compliance was made before him and the details and documents as called for were not provided. He explained that the non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) was due to the default of the counsel and the assessee being engaged in charitable activities should not be made to suffer for such default. He, therefore, requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(E) by setting aside the matter before him.

6.

Shri R. P. Rastogi, the Ld. CIT-DR, had no objection if the matter was set aside to Ld. CIT(E) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

7.

We have considered the request of the assessee. The application of the assessee was rejected only for the reason that no compliance was made before the Ld. CIT(E) and the details and documents as called for were not provided. In the absence of any documentary evidence, the Ld. CIT(E) was not satisfied about the genuineness of the activities of the Trust and about fulfilment of conditions as laid down in section 80G(5) of the Act. Considering the fact that the assessee is engaged in charitable activities, we deem it proper to allow another opportunity to the assessee by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. CIT(E) is directed to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to make compliance and furnish the details and documents as required by him. The assessee is also directed to comply to the directions of the Ld. CIT(E)

ITA No. 2533/Ahd/2025 Wisdom Education and welfare trust Vs. CIT(E)

in the course of set aside proceeding and the produce the documents and details as called for.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Court on 07/05/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 07th May, 2026 (True Copy) Neelesh,Sr. PS आदेश आदेश क� आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण / DR, ITAT, 6. गाड� फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार

पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार उप उप सहायक सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(iii)

All 687 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →