SHETH HARILAL HARIVALLABHDAS DHARMADA TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2150/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 September 20264 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that sufficient time was not granted to make a proper representation before the CIT(E). The second notice was issued on 16/09/2025, requiring a reply by 19/09/2025, and the assessee's request for adjournment on 19/09/2025 was not allowed. The CIT(E) proceeded to pass the order on 24/09/2025, citing the limitation period expiring on 30/09/2025. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order dated 24/09/2025 passed by the CIT(E). The CIT(E) is directed to adjudicate the application afresh after considering all relevant documents and submissions and granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to submit relevant documents and cooperate with the proceedings. Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical purposes without findings on merits. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sheth Harilal Harivallabhdas Dharmada Trust, filed an appeal against the order dated 24/09/2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad (CIT(E)). The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the rejection was based on insufficient opportunity to be heard. The CIT(E) had issued two notices, the second on 16/09/2025, requiring a reply by 19/09/2025. The assessee requested an adjournment on 19/09/2025, but the CIT(E) passed the order on 24/09/2025, citing the expiry of the adjudication limitation period on 30/09/2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Learned CIT(E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appellant's application for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by not providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity of being heard? Assessee's Contentions: - The assessee is a genuine charitable trust registered under Section 12A, engaged in public benefit activities. - The mention of "Vaishnavs" in the old trust deed does not restrict its benefits to a particular community. - The order was passed without affording a sufficient and reasonable opportunity of being heard, as only three days were given to respond to the show cause notice alleging it operated as a private trust. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records that the Learned Departmental Representatives appeared and were heard, but does not detail their specific arguments regarding the opportunity of being heard or the merits of the trust's charitable nature.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1.

By way of the present appeal the Assessee has challenged the Order, dated 24/09/2025, passed by Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(E)’], whereby the application filed by the Assessee seeking approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] was rejected.

2.

The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

1.

The Ld. CIT (E) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appe

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →