DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

9. The revenue has further challenged allowing of exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act Ld CITA holding the assessee not violated the provisions of section 13(1)(d)(i) r.w.s. 11(5) of the Act in case of investment made with Shriram 9.1. Heard the parties, perused the records. The brief facts leading to this case is this that

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

9. The revenue has further challenged allowing of exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act Ld CITA holding the assessee not violated the provisions of section 13(1)(d)(i) r.w.s. 11(5) of the Act in case of investment made with Shriram 9.1. Heard the parties, perused the records. The brief facts leading to this case is this that

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

9. The revenue has further challenged allowing of exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act Ld CITA holding the assessee not violated the provisions of section 13(1)(d)(i) r.w.s. 11(5) of the Act in case of investment made with Shriram 9.1. Heard the parties, perused the records. The brief facts leading to this case is this that

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

9. The revenue has further challenged allowing of exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act Ld CITA holding the assessee not violated the provisions of section 13(1)(d)(i) r.w.s. 11(5) of the Act in case of investment made with Shriram 9.1. Heard the parties, perused the records. The brief facts leading to this case is this that

RURAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION,ANAND vs. CPC, BENGALURU JURIS. AO- THE ITO, WARD-EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.927/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Rural Development Cpc, Bengaluru बनाम/ Foundation Juris.Ao – The Ito Ward- V/S. Aitc, 2Nd Floor Exemption Narayan Complex Vadodara – 390 007 Nr.Shubh Laxmi Shopping Centre Station Road Anand – 388 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabtr 1090 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arti N. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 21/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-2020. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Rural Development Foundation Vs. Cpc, Bengaluru Juris Ao The Ito, Ward-Exemption Asst. Year : 2019-20

9. Further, support is drawn from the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in Indian Medical Association vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2025] 175 taxmann.com 811 (Pune - Trib.) [16-06-2025], wherein it was held that where the assessee trust had filed a valid belated return under section 139(4) along with the audit report in Form

CLEAN TEETH CLEAN MOUTH CHARITABLE TRUST,RAJKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

139 taxmann.com 121 (Calcutta). Further, CIT(E) observed that CBDT on multiple occasions had extended the time line in filing the application in Form 10Ab and vide Circular No. 8/2022 had extended the time line to 30.09.2022. Thereafter, another Circular No. 6/2023 dated 24.05.2023 was introduced, but in such Circular the date so far as filing of Form 10AB under

NANA AND RANDER SUNNI VOHRA MEDICAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (EXEMPTION ) AHMEDABAD, AHMRDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

139 taxmann.com 121 (Calcutta). Further, CIT(E) observed that CBDT on multiple occasions had extended the time line in filing the application in Form 10AB and vide Circular No. 8/2022 had extended the time line to 30.09.2022. Thereafter, another Circular No. 6/2023 dated 24.05.2023 was introduced, but in such Circular the date so far as filing of Form 10AB under

KOSHAMBH CHARITABLE TRUST,VADODARA vs. CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, VADODARA

In the result, the above ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 11 should not have been denied. Koshambh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4– 6. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that assessee trust is eligible to claim deduction u/s 11 of the Act. Further copy of audit report in form 10B which could not be submitted electronically due to inadvertence was also enclosed

SHRI MAHESH P. GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-10,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1022 To 1025/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: (1992-1993 To 1995-1996) Shri Mahesh P. Gandhi, A.C.I.T., D-404, 5Th Floor, Vs. Circle-10, Dharnidhar Tower, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad.

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that: “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate

AKSHAT EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.457/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Akshat Education & Charitable The Income Tax Officer, Trust, बनाम Ward (Exemption), / 5/35, Gosainu Faliyu, Vadodara. V/S. Asodar Borsad Road, Asodar, Anand-388307. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaeta2211K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Coimbatore [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 25.01.2025, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] For The Assessment Year 2020–21. The Impugned Order Arises Out Of The Akshat Education & Charitable Trust Vs. Ito(E) Assessment Year 2020-21

139(1) stood extended to 15.02.2021, and hence both filings were beyond the statutory due date. 3. The CPC, Bengaluru processed the return under section 143(1). While doing so, it denied the exemption claimed under section 11 on the ground that the return and audit report were filed belatedly. Consequently, the entire gross receipts

SHREE HARSANIJI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), PALANPUR

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Harsaniji Public Charitable Trust Ito (Exemption) 32, Shiv Society Part-2 Vs Palanpur. Nr.B.K. Cinema Mehsana 384 002. Pan : Aaats 7750 B.

9) of section 139 of the Act, in letter and spirit. We also find that the ld.CIT(A), NAFC has simply extracted the written submissions filed by the assessee, wherein Circular No.273 dated 3.6.1980 was also reproduced in which the Board has clearly authorized Commissioners to admit applications under section 11(2) of the Act read with Rule

SHRI MANAV VIKAS FOUNDATION,CHAMARAJ, TL. VADHAVAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

charitable or religious trusts, etc. 17B. The report of audit of the accounts of a trust or institution which is required to be furnished under sub-clause (ii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, shall be in- (a) Form No. 108 where- (I) the total income of such trust or institution, without giving effect

SHIKSHA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

charitable trust registered under section 12A, had substantially satisfied condition for availing benefit of exemption as a trust, it could not be denied exemption merely on bar of limitation in furnishing audit report in Form no. 10B. 7.5 In the case of CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries201 ITR 325 (Gujarat), the High Court held that where an assessee could

TATAM SEVA SANSTHAN,BHAVNAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMEPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

139 taxmann.com 121 (Calcutta). Further, CIT(E) observed that CBDT on multiple occasions had extended the time line in filing the application in Form 10AB and vide Circular No. 8/2022 had extended the time line to 30.09.2022. Thereafter, another Circular No. 6/2023 dated 24.05.2023 was introduced, but in such Circular the date so far as filing of Form 10AB under

KANCHANBA EDUCATION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE AC/DCIT. CIRCLE-1, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

139(1) of the Act, had not been filed. Instead, the assessee had filed Form 10BB on 25.09.2024 believing that it was eligible for exemption under section 10(23C). Upon realizing the legal position under section 11(7) that a trust registered under section 12A cannot simultaneously claim exemption under section 10(23C), the assessee filed Form

PARANTAP CHARITABLE TRUST,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1697/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम Parantap Charitable Trust Income Tax Officer 421, Vraj Siddhi Tower, Ward – Exemption, / Khanderao Market Char Vadodara Vs. Rasta, Rajmahal Road, Vadodara - 390001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aactp0976E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Rushin Patel, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. Dr 07/01/2026 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2026 O R D E R The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As “Nfac”), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 15.06.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) & Relates To Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts of the case, in confining the direction Circular No.10/2019 in taking cognizance of Form

HEALTH FOUNDATION & RESEARCH CENTRE,DAHOD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

139(1) of the Act, and no application for condonation of delay had been filed before the jurisdictional Commissioner as contemplated under section 119(2)(b). It was further submitted that the return of the assessee was not processed under section 143(1), and the assessment was completed under section 143(3), thereby requiring a stricter standard of compliance

MAHAVIR KELAVANI MANDAL,ANTROLI vs. WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2016-17 Mahavir Kelavani Mandal, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Antroli, Income-Tax, C/O. Mahavir Kelavani Mandal, Bangalore Nadiad, Gujarat – 387366 Pan: Aactm 6322 R अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar: Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Bengaluru (Hereinafter Referred To As 'Cit(A)’) Dated 29.02.2024, In The Matter Of Intimation Issued U/S 143(1) Issued By Cpc, Bangalore On 01.03.2019. 2. Following Are The Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:_ “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Upholding The Disallowance Made In The Intimation Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act Which Was Passed Without Giving Any Opportunity Of Being Heard To Your Appellant. In The Said Intimation Order, The Claim Of Exemption U/S 11 Of The It Act Is Denied & A Demand Is Raised. Such Arbitrary Disallowance Of Exemption Is Prayed To Be Deleted. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Upheld The Disallowance Of Exemption U/S 11 Of The It Act In The Intimation Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act Making An Addition Of Rs. 40,67,000/- On Account Of Income Chargeable U/S 12(2) Of The Mahavir Kelavani Mandal Vs. Dcit Asst. Year : 2016-17 2

trust registered under section 12AA of the Act. The assessee is running a school and engaged in educational activities. The assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 31.03.2018 declaring Nil income. The assessee also attached audited financial statements along the return of income and filed form 10B which is an audit report under section