MATRUSHRI MUKTABEN MORARJIBHAI NATHWANI CHARITABLE TRUST,RAJKOT vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1289/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 February 2026Bench: SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee had not explained the delay in filing the appeal and appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 186 days without a condonation application. Despite multiple opportunities for hearing and notification of defects, the assessee remained absent and did not rectify the issues.

What were the issues?

Dismissal of appeal due to significant delay, lack of condonation, and persistent absence of the assessee.

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, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-D.R
Hearing: 19.02.2026Pronounced: 25.02.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, [in short “the CIT(E)”] dated 03.09.2024 in the proceeding u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

There was a delay of 186 days in filing of this appeal. No condonation application has been filed by the assessee. The defect was notified to the assessee on 21.07.2025 and a reminder was also sent on 11.08.2025. However, the defect has not been rectified and no Matrushri Muktaben Morarjibhai Nathwani Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) 2 condonation application has been filed by the assessee. In fact, the notices sent to the assessee by speed post was also returned unserved with the remark “Not known”. The assessee was allowed four opportunities of hearing on 15.09.2025, 17.11.2025, 20.01.2026 and finally on 19.02.2026, but no one was present on behalf of the assessee on any of the occasion. Neither any adjournment application was filed by the assessee. Considering the fact that the assessee has not explained the delay in filing of this appeal and that it is not interested in persecuting the matter, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on 25/02/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd- Sd/- (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 25th February, 2026 Neelesh Kumar True Copy 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.

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 →