TENDANCE FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(E), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2480/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 October 20264 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) and remitted the matter back for de novo consideration. The Tribunal followed the reasoning of the co-ordinate bench in *Shri Sanskar Education And Cheritable Trust* (supra), which condoned a delay and directed the CIT(E) to pass a fresh order after granting an adequate opportunity of hearing. This decision was made in the interest of justice and fairness. The assessee was directed to pay a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the PM National Relief Fund within three weeks. The assessee was also directed to be compliant and diligently furnish all details without seeking unnecessary adjournments. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Tendance Foundation, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad. The CIT(E) had denied registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds that the application was filed late by 11 days. The CIT(E) held that the power to condone such delays rests solely with the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and not with the Commissioner. The assessee contended that the delay was due to administrative and procedural reasons, not deliberate, and relied on a co-ordinate bench decision that condoned a similar delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has the power to condone a delay in filing an application for registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the delay is attributable to administrative and procedural reasons. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the delay of 11 days was unintentional and due to administrative/procedural reasons. They relied on the ITAT Surat Bench decision in *Shri Sanskar Education And Cheritable Trust* (ITA No. 756/SRT/2025), where a delay of 41 days was condoned and the matter was remitted for de novo consideration. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the CIT-DR, did not present any arguments on the merits of the delay or the assessee's eligibility. The CIT(E)'s order stated that the Commissioner has no power to condone the delay, as such power rests only with the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80G(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH

Before: Shri Tapas Ram Misra & Shri R. Govindarajan

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before Shri Tapas Ram Misra, Judicial Member And Shri R. Govindarajan, Accountant Member ITA No. 2480/Ahd/2026 Assessment Year: N.A.

Tendance Foundation CIT(E), Ahmedabad Tendance Foundation 3 6th Floor, 609, Aaykar Vs ,Sahjanand Status, Science Bhavan, Vejalpur, City Road,, Ahmedabad- Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380060, Gujarat Ahmedabad-380015, Gujarat PAN: AAFCT9996A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 26-10-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-10-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER TAPAS RAM MISRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad denying registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on the ground that the assessee’s application was filed late by 11 days. 2. The Ld. CIT(E) has mentioned in the order that the power to condone the delay rests only with the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the same and proceed with the application. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(E) is reproduced below:

“3. In the present case, from the details/documents available with this office, it is gathered that the applicant holds a regular approval of 5 consecutive assessment years under Form 10AC / Form 10AD with following details: Sr. No. Description Remarks 1 Registration granted under which Form 10AC FORM 2 URN number or DIN number AAFCT9996AF20216 3 Date of granting approval 3/10/2022 4 Period from which approval From: A.Y.2022-2026 granted On the other hand, on perusal of the circular number 11 of 2022 issued on 03.06.2022 by the CBDT New Delhi it has been clarified at para-5 that “the conditions contained in Form No. 10AC, issued between 01.04.2021 till the date of issuance of this Circular, shall be read as if the said conditions had been substituted with the conditions as provided in the Table 1 with effect from 1st April,2022;” The above clarification also prevail for the approval given in Form 10AD by the CIT(Exemption). Accordingly, it is evident that a provisional/regular approval has been issued subject to certain conditions which are in place till date since 01.04.2021 and on perusal of the conditions stipulated at row 10(d) of Form 10AC / row 4 of Annexure “E” of Circular No. 11 of 2022 dtd. 03.06.2022, the applicant was well informed that “Where the institution or fund is required to furnish application for approval under clause (ii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G, the said institution or fund shall furnish such application within the time allowed under that clause.” Hence, the applicant at the very instance of issuance of approval under Form 10AC/Form 10AD was well informed/aware about statutory provision/dates and the applicant was supposed to be vigilant while obtaining approval and should have adhere the strict time lines. However, the applicant has submitted present application after the due date. 4 Therefore, as it has been already pointed out that the time limits prescribed in section 80G(5) of the Act discussed in Para above, are mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No. 10AB. Such powers rest with CBDT only. 5. In view of the above discussion, it held that the present application in Form No. 10AB has not been filed within the time limit prescribed therein and therefore, the same is rejected as non-maintainable without going into the merits. 6. However, the assessee is free to examine its eligibility to file application u/s. 354 of the I.T. Act 2025 (Table SI. No. 2) as per law if it suits its requirements.”

3.

Ld. A.R. Shri Parin Shah submitted an affidavit stating that due to certain administrative and procedural reasons, the assessee was unable to file the application within the stipulated time even though the necessary documents, records and information were substantially ready. The appeal was filed after the delay of 11 days, which was neither deliberate nor intentional and there was no mala fide intention to file the application late or to gain any undue advantage of such late filing.

4.

The Ld. A.R. has also relied upon a decision of ITAT Surat Bench in the case of Shri Sanskar Education And Cheritable Trust in ITA No. 756/SRT/2025 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench had condoned the delay of 41 days in that case and remitted the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) with the direction to pass a de novo order after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This direction was made subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs.5,000/- to the credit of the “PM National Relief Fund” within 3 weeks from receipt of this order.

5.

In the interest of justice and fairness and following the reasoning of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Shri Sanskar Education And Cheritable Trust (supra), we set aside the order of the CIT(E) and remit the matter back with a direction to pass a de novo order in accordance with law and on merits after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This direction is subject to the imposition of a cost of Rs. 5,000/- which shall be paid by the assessee to the credit of the “PM National Relief Fund” within 3 weeks from receipt of this order. The assessee is also directed to be compliant and diligently furnish all details and explanations as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(E) without seeking unnecessary adjournments and causing any undue delay.

6.

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

This Order is pronounced on 27/10/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (R. GOVINDARAJAN) (TAPAS RAM MISRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : True Copy Dated 27/10/2026 Rajesh आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee JEETENDRA Digitally signed by JEETENDRA 2. Revenue DEVENDRABHAI UPADHYAY DN: c=IN, o=PERSONAL, title=6087, DEVENDRA 3. Concerned CIT 2.5.4.20=7e5568a89b633f174b28a80f 5e63c638da40b7313fb47ebaefda841 cf59d1703, postalCode=380059, 4. CIT (A) BHAI st=Gujarat, serialNumber=816dc56e896211a1a2 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 1ccc4abc94ddc94458f4a1b37be8e18 54e9399295106d4, cn=JEETENDRA UPADHYAY 6. Guard file. DEVENDRABHAI UPADHYAY Date: 2026.10.30 10:11:37 +05'30' By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →