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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act by and under the order dated 25.04.2006 issued under the signature of the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) being Memo No.DIT(E)/80G/42/W.2/2006-07. The assessee Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income

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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act by and under the order dated 25.04.2006 issued under the signature of the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) being Memo No.DIT(E)/80G/42/W.2/2006-07. The assessee Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income

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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act by and under the order dated 25.04.2006 issued under the signature of the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) being Memo No.DIT(E)/80G/42/W.2/2006-07. The assessee Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income

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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act by and under the order dated 25.04.2006 issued under the signature of the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) being Memo No.DIT(E)/80G/42/W.2/2006-07. The assessee Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income

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

2– first proviso. On receipt of application, CIT(E) observed that as per provisions of Section 80G(5) as it stands from 01.04.2021, in the present case, since the assessee had got provisional approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act, the applicant was required to file application in Form No. 10AB under Clause (iii) of first proviso

SHRI RAJESH RAVINDRAN CHARITY TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

Trust. vs. CIT(E)] - 5 – “Deduction in respect of donations to certain funds, charitable institutions, etc. 80G. …………. ……………….. (5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-section (2

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S.UNITED WAYOF BARODA, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

IV. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4. There are thus two issues requiring our adjudication in this appeal- first, whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that proviso to Section 2(15) will not have

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

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

iv) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act. In that case, the provisional registration was granted in form No.10AC on 27.10.2021. Admitted fact in the case is that the assessee Trust commenced its activities from 13.10.2021 being new Trust and assessee filed application for grant of approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION),CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. NANDESARI INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION,, NANDESARI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

iv) Assessee is claiming that they are trade association and are working on the principle of mutuality, but this contention is disproved in the discussion in the para 4 as they are dealing with the non-members that is to say outside the group, hence negating the principle of mutuality. This results into the fact that they fall under

ARYAGRAM VIRASAT FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na Aryagram Virasat Foundation, Vs. Commissioner Of Income- P No. 300/23, Kanya Gurukul, Tax (Exemption), Nr. Sent Ann School, Nr. Hira Ahmedabad Jain Society, Ramnagar, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad-380005 Pan : Aaqca 9818 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devan Kapadia, Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024

iv) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of Section 80G of the Act for the period commencing from 24.05.2022 to AY 2025-26. Thereafter, on 29.09.2023, the assessee filed Form No. 10AB seeking final approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act in terms of sub-clause (iii) thereof. It is this application of the ITA No. 1103/Ahd /2024

SHREE STHANAKVASI JAIN SANGH JIVRAJPARK,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

80G. …………. ……………….. (5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub- clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-section (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable purpose.” 9. Besides being established for a charitable purpose, the fund or institution is also required to fulfill certain other conditions one of which, pertinent