NISHKAM SHEWA MANDAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1430/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 February 2026Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting the lack of intentional non-compliance by the assessee. It set aside the impugned order of the CIT(E) and restored the matter for fresh consideration, directing the CIT(E) to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity to present its case. The assessee was also directed to be diligent with future communications.

What were the facts?

The assessee-trust, Nishkam Shewa Mandal, appealed against the CIT(E)'s order dated 17/12/2024, which rejected its application for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was filed with a delay of 136 days. This delay resulted from the assessee's former consultant, whose email was registered for communications, retiring and an oversight in updating the communication address with the department, leading to non-receipt of the rejection order.

What were the issues?

1. Condonation of delay of 136 days in filing the appeal. 2. Rejection of the assessee's application for approval under Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12A(1)(ac)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, AR
Hearing: 12/11/2025Pronounced: 09/02/2026

"ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद" के सम!। ] ] Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.1430/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : NA Nishkam Shewa Mandal The CIT (Exemption) बनाम/ A-4, Kotarpur Ahmedabad – 380 015 v/s. Hansol Ahmedabad – 382 475 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAATN 2481 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mohit Balani, AR Revenue by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 09/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee-trust against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’] dated 17/12/2024, rejecting the application of the assessee for approval under clause(iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Nishkam Shewa Mandal vs. CIT(E)

2.

The appeal of the assessee is time-barred by 136 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed.

3.

At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) was communicated to the assessee on 17/12/2024 and, thus, the time-limit to file this present appeal was lapsed on 28/02/2025 and that is why the delay has occurred. The assessee has registered tja.it1947@gmail.com as an official email address for communication, which belonged to the assessee’s former Consultant and the said Consultant had retired from professional practice.

3.1. An affidavit of the Trustee of the assessee, in this respect, has been filed, wherein, the assessee submitted the reason for such delay as under: “i. That the Applicant had preferred an application seeking registration under Section 80G (5) of the Income Tax Act before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), which came to be rejected on the basis that the Applicant’s registration for S.12A was rejected. ii. The Applicant most respectfully states and submits that the Applicant has registered tja.it1947@gmail.com, as an official email address for communication, which belonged to the Applicant's erstwhile consultant, however the said E consultant has retired from active professional practice. Subsequently, a new consultant was appointed by the Applicant; however, the process of updating the communication address with the Department was inadvertently not carried out, due to which important departmental communications could not be effectively accessed by the Applicant. iii. That thereafter the Applicant realised the passing of the order passed in connection with the Application filed u/s S.12A(1)(ac) of the Act which was also passed ex-parte and the application in connection with the said appeal was filed by Applicant's counsel on 13/05/2025 in ITA No. 1051/Ahd/2025. iv. While preparing the paperbook for the Appeal in the Appellant’s lawyer, realized that the application under Section 80G(5) had also been Nishkam Shewa Mandal vs. CIT(E)

3 rejected vide order dated 17.12.2024 (Impugned Order), Until then, the Applicant had no knowledge of the said rejection order, as no effective communication had been received in this regard. v. That the appeal was ultimately filed on 14.07.2025, resulting in a delay of 136 days from the date of the impugned order.

3.2. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the non- representation of the assessee and furnishing of required details before the Ld.CIT(E) was not intentional. He has submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) to reconsider the assessee’s application for approval u/s.80G of the Act.

4.

The Ld.DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the findings of the Ld.CIT(E).

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. Considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well-served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld.CIT(E). In view of this, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Thus, the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(E) is hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld.CIT(E) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the Ld.CIT(E) will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case and thereafter to decide the same in accordance with law. It is also directed that the assessee will take due care of the email/notices issued by the Ld.CIT(E) and will promptly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for by the Ld.CIT(E). Nishkam Shewa Mandal vs. CIT(E)

6.

With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

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 →