SHRI SOUDHARMA BRIHAD TAPOGACHCHIYA TRISTUTIK JAIN SANGHA SAMARPANAM,AHMEDABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of\nmerits and the same is hereby dismissed

1)(b) of the Act is applicable only to\nthe charitable trust.\n4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the\nlearned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in holding that\nassessee-trust has conducted 'specified violations' as per the explanation to\nsection 12AB(4) of the Act without considering

SHREE SANAND JAMALIYA PATIDAR PANCH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

160 taxmann.com 217 (Bangalore-Trib.) Thus Ld. Counsel pleaded to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(E) and direct to grant registration u/s. 12AB of the Act to the assessee Trust. 5. Per contra, Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E). 6. We have considered rival submissions and perused

ANJUMAN E NUSRATUL MUSLIMIN TANKARIA,BHARUCH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

160 taxmann.com 358 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), wherein the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

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

160 taxmann.com 624 (Kolkata – Tribunal), the Tribunal has held that where assessee had been granted provisional approval under clause (iv) to first to section 80G(5), application nor final approval under clause (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) could not be rejected on ground that institution had already commenced its activities even prior to grant of provisional registration

BHOJALRAM LEUVA PATEL SEVA SAMAJ TRUST,DEVKI GALOL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

160 taxmann.com 358 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

BHOJALRAM LEUVA PATEL SEVA SAMAJ TRUST,DEVKI GALOL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

160 taxmann.com 358 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

SHREE NAMINATH SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK TAPAGACHH JAIN RELIGIOUS TRUST,VAPI vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

160 taxmann.com 358/205 ITD 673 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

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

160 taxmann.com 624 (Kolkata – Tribunal), the Tribunal has held that where assessee had been granted provisional approval under clause (iv) to first to section 80G(5), application nor final approval under clause (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) could not be rejected on ground that institution had already commenced its activities even prior to grant of provisional registration

GROW FOUNDATION GANDHINAGAR,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 9

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Charitable Trust vs. ITO 160 taxmann.com 475 (Chennai – Tribunal), while passing the order the Tribunal held that the Timeline prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) should be treated as directory and not mandatory, hence, once timeline prescribed for filing Form N0.10A for recognition under section 12A had been extended up to 30.09.2023, same

MAA SHARDA KOTHARI FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : - Maa Sharda Kothari Foundation Commissioner Of 7, Mahavir Bungalows Vs. Income Tax Nr.Prernatirth Derasar (Exemption) Jodhpur Gam Vejalpur Ahmedabad 380 015. Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaatm 7202 Q (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr

charitable activity within the prescribed time frame. 7. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred the present appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal: 1. The Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts by rejection of the application made u/s. 12AB(1)(b) of I. T. Act, 1961. 2. The appellant

THE NA vs. ARI AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY,NAVSARIVS.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: 30.09.2022 As It Has Already Commenced 06.03.2004 Activities On 06-03-2022. 2. The Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Has Erred In Facts & In Law In Rejecting The Application Under Section 80G (5) For The Reason That The Trust University Has Made Application For Final Registration Within The Validity Of Provisional Registration & That The Provisional Registration Is Valid Till Ay 2025-26. 3. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law, The Ld. Cit(Exemption) Has Erred In Rejecting Assessee'S Application U/S 80G(5) Filed On 28.03.2023 On The Ground That Assessee Didn'T File The Application Before 30.09.2022 When The Assessee Has Filed The Application In Time As Per The Extension Granted Till 30.09.2023 As Per Circular No.6/2023 Dated 29-05-2023

Charitable Trust vs. ITO 160 taxmann.com 475 (Chennai – Tribunal), while passing the order the Tribunal held that the Timeline prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) should be treated as directory and not mandatory, hence, once timeline prescribed for filing Form N0.10A for recognition under section 12A had been extended up to 30.09.2023, same

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

Charitable Trust vs. ITO 160 taxmann.com 475 (Chennai – Tribunal), while passing the order the Tribunal held that the Timeline prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) should be treated as directory and not mandatory, hence, once timeline prescribed for filing Form No.10A for recognition under section 12A had been extended up to 30.09.2023, same

BHURABHAI PUNJABHAI PARSANA FOUNDATION,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION) , AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust vs. ITO 160 taxmann.com 475 (Chennai – Tribunal), while passing the order the Tribunal held that the Timeline prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) should be treated as directory and not mandatory, hence, once timeline prescribed for filing Form No. 10A for recognition under section 12A had been extended up to 30.09.2023, same

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

160. By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged correctness of the order dated 10th November 2014 passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12. 161. In ground no. 1, the grievance raised by the assessee was as follows

SHREE KALOL STHANAKVASI JAIN MITRA MANDAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

160 taxmann.com 358/205 ITD 673 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

ROTARY INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT 3054 CHARITABLE TRUST ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust. vs. CIT(E) Leuva Patel Seva Samaj Trust [2024] 162 taxmann.com 270 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that provisions of section 13(1)(b) can be invoked only at the time of assessment and not at the time of grant of registration under section 12A. Again, in the case of Jamiatul Banaat Tankaria [2024] 160

SHRI UMRALA TALUKA SARDAR PATEL PRAJAPATI SAMAJ TRUST,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, in view of the above observations, the matter is restored to the file of CIT

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

160 taxmann.com 358 (Ahmedabad-Trib.), the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, Ld. CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

NATIONAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL GUJARAT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year : - National Real Estate Development Vs. Commissioner Of Council Gujarat Income-Tax (Exemption) B-807, Times Square-2 Ahmedabad. Nr.Avlon Hotel, Thaltej Ahmedabad. Pan : Aagan 1280 J

160 taxmann.com 358 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) , the ITAT held that where objects of assessee-trust were primarily charitable rather than favouring any specific religious community, CIT(E) was not justified in denying registration under Section 12A, by invoking Section 13(1

VISMRUTI SOCIAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee / applicant trust is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

1.\nLd. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in rejecting\nthe application of appellant for registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the I.T. Act.\n2.\nLd. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in concluding\nthat the object no. 7 & 8 as mentioned in the trust deed are of religious nature