Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 144B, Section 142(1), Section 250(6).

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

Q: How many judgments cite Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.?

451 judgments on BharatTax cite Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (2 SCC 107), spanning 2013 to 2026.

2 SCC 107Supreme Court of India1987#157 most cited

What is Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. authority for?

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

451

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,714 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Collector v. Katiji · Mst. Katiji · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · liberal approach · justice on merits · extension of limitation · reasonable cause · Section 250 · Section 147 · Section 148

Sections most often in play

Section 250 Section 147 Section 144 Section 144B Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

extension of limitation reasonable cause delay in filing appeal best judgment assessment section 12a(1)(ac)(iii)section 250(6)section 12a(1)(ac)condonation of delay section 12a(1)section 80g(5)service of notice section 12ab

Judgments citing Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

The Nashik Jilha Mahila Sahakari Bank Limited, Nashik vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed

ITA 1372/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar

Section 147Section 250

…ipulated time. We note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeals with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 27 days in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. 4. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) on the gives dates of hearing a…

Krishna Nrsing Home, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 5, Panvel

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

ITA 768/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…lated time. I note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 631 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “The following grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one other:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of th…

Dr. Pratap Pandhiranath Patil, Pune vs. PCIT - 2, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 1026/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Iyer and Shri Siddhant G. BiswasFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…tipulated time. We note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 23 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. The Ld. PCIT has failed to appreciate that for invoking Section 263, both conditions must be satisfied simultaneously:…

Sri Venugopalakrishna Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1313/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12 Sri Venugopalakrishna Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society, Ward – 5(2)(4), No.123/3, 9Th Cross, 2Nd Main Chamajpet, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 018. Pan :Aabas 6974 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. H. Guruswamy, Itp Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. H. Guruswamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue

Section 148Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…d. Accordingly, there is a delay in filing the appeal. On going through the explanation submitted by the learned Counsel and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income on 09.02.2012 declaring Nil income after claiming deduction of Rs.26,62,456/- under section 80P of the Act. The notice was issued under section 148 of the Act on 28.03.2018 which was served to the assessee. A…

Indrajit Ramchandra Jagtap, Maharashtra vs. ITO TDS Ward Kolhapur

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

ITA 570/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist

Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…tipulated time. We note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 583 days in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 8. Under these given facts and circumstances when the delay before ld.CIT(A) has been condoned and ld.CIT(A) having not dealt with merits of the case, we therefore remand back all…

Machindra Baburao Suke, Pune vs. ITO Ward 5(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the observations made in the order

ITA 1245/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Respondent: Appellant by Shri Amit Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…hat the 2 Machindra Baburao Suke assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 214 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Assessee has raised as many as 15 grounds of appeal raising various issues which revolve around the following three additions confirme…

Suvarna Gramin Bigarsheti Sah. Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Sangli vs. ITO, Ward-2, Sangli

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 527/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri S. N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 80P

…lated time. I note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 242 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment order has been framed u/s.144 of the Act and before ld.CIT(A…

Rajrshi Shahu Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Kurundwad, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ichalkaranji

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/PUN/2025[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Sept 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

…lated time. I note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 930 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. The sole grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs.40,000/- levied u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act @ Rs.10,000/- for each non-appearance o…

Khalil Kashim Darwajkar, Kolhapur vs. ITO, Ward-1(), Kolhapur

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

ITA 1662/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari

Section 144Section 250Section 444

…Darwajkar time. We note that the assessee has not gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 288 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee failed to appear before the lower authorities and therefore the issue on merits may be restored to the f…

Mr. Avinash Haribhau Shinde, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 14(1), Pune

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

ITA 1657/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

…stipulated time. We note that the assessee has not gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 76 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee failed to appear before the lower authorities and therefore the issue on merits may be restored to the fi…

Mr. Vijay Bajirao Balwadkar, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 2(2) Pune, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 1637/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare

Section 14Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…ated time. I note that the appellant would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 345 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('…

Rakam Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-21(1), Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1180/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Rakam Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito F-33/3, Okhla Industrial Area, Ward-21(1), Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110020 Delhi Pan: Aaacr028G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca & Sh. Mohan Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal

Section 143(3)Section 144B

…1 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Rakam Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO F-33/3, Okhla Industrial Area, WARd-21(1), Phase-II, New Delhi-110020 Delhi PAN: AAACR028G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Mansi Jain, CA, & Sh. Mohan Gupta, CA Revenue by Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissio…

Mysore Race Club Limited, Mysore vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Mysore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 695/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Tharun Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…r the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3. On going through the explanation submitted by the learned Counsel and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Mysore Race Club Ltd., derives income from organizing races, filed its return of income on 25.10.2017 declaring taxable income of Rs.4,41,27,350/-. Later on the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. Accordingly, notice under se…

Mysore Race Club Limited, Mysore vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Mysore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 694/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Tharun Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40A(3)

Muniyappa Muniraju, Bengaluru vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-2, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1119/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Muniyappa Muniraju, Vs. Pr. Cit, No.1/3, 1St Cross, Muni Narasimhaiah Bangalore - 2. Garden, Chocolate Factory Main Road, Btm I Stage, Bangalore – 560 029, Karnataka. Pan : Anjpm 0458 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194HSection 263Section 44A

…r the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 4. On going through the explanation submitted by the learned Counsel and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. DR relied on the Order of learned Pr.CIT and submitted that learned Pr.CIT has power to exercise his jurisdiction as per provisions of section263 of the Act that any Order passed by the AO can be examined as per the provisions of income tax Act. 6. Considering the rival submissions and…

Bahubali Kallappa Kabadge, Sangli Miraj vs. ITO, Ward-5, Sangli

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are

ITA 392/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, DR (virtual)

Section 147Section 250Section 69A

…eal and the same is not intentional. I, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also placing reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), condone the delay of 15 days and 401 days in filing of the instant appeals for A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively and admit them for adjudication. 4. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee failed to appea…

Ganpat Vasant Randive, Village - Tungat, Taluka - Pandharpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Pandharpur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for

ITA 1940/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Banis (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, DR (virtual)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Ganpat Vasant Randive, vs. ITO, Ward-2, Pandharpur Village Tungat, Post Tungar, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur, Maharashtra. PAN : BACPR 6655 R (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Subhash Banis (virtual) For Revenue : Shri Manoj Tripathi, DR (virtual) Date of Hearing : 08.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2025 ORDER This appeal at the instance of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2017-18 (A.Y.) is directed against the order of L…

Ratnatray Foundation, Pune vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1628/PUN/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…ed time. We note that the assessee would not have gained from filing the appeals with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) for grant of registration u/s.12AB of the…

Ratnatray Foundation, Nashik vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1627/PUN/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2026-27

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Shree Khandiba De vs. TAN Trust, Punevs.CIT-Exemption, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1218/PUN/2025[-]Status: HeardITAT Pune09 Sept 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

…t would not have gained from 2 Shree Khandiba Devasthan Trust filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 129 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) for grant of registration u/s.1…