SWAMI VIVEKANAND EDUCATION & CULTURAL TRUST,VAPI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

By way of the present appeal Assessee has challenged the Order, dated 21/01/2026, passed by Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’], whereby the application filed by the Assessee in Form No. 10AB under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] was rejected.

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1.That the Ld. CIT(E), Ahmedabad had gone wrong in passing the order rejecting the application submitted by the appellant in Form 10AB seeking regular approval under section 80G(5)(iii) without providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard. Assessment Year 2026-2027

That the Ld. CIT(E) had erred in law for not condoning the genuine and bonafide mistake of selecting of wrong section code in Form 10AB as (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80G' instead of '(ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80G'.

The appellant craves leave to add, amend, revise, modify, substitute or rescind any of the grounds) of appeal, before or at the time of hearing of this appeal."

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

In the impugned order, it has been recorded by the Learned CIT(E) as under:

The contention of the Assessee is that there was inadvertent mistake committed by the Assessee in selecting the provisions while filing the application online and that the application filed by the Assessee was rejected without granting any hearing to the Assessee. On the other hand, the Learned Departmental Repetitive submitted that there was no infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(E) as it was apparent that the application was filed under incorrect provision.

Having given thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and on perusal of record we find that the application filed by the Assessee was dismissed by the Learned CIT(E) as not maintainable without returning any findings on merits. As per Row No.10 of the table on the first page of the impugned order (in Form No. 10AD), we find that no opportunity

From the facts as recorded by the Learned CIT(E) is apparent that there was an inadvertent mistake by the Assessee in selecting the provision in the drop-down box while filing online application. The Assessee is directed to move application seeking rectification of application and subject to the same, the Learned CIT(E) is directed to consider the application filed by the Assessee as application filed under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the Act. It is clarified that the Learned CIT(E) would be at liberty to dispose off the said application under Section 80G(5)(ii) of the Act as per law after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Assessee would be at liberty to satisfy the Learned CIT(E) that there is no delay in filing the application and/or move application seeking condonation of delay before the appropriate authority as per law, as the case may be.

In terms of aforesaid, Ground No.1 and 2 raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced on 22.06.2026 (Dr. B.R.R Kumar) Judicial Member

""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.