PRAYATNA CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Charitable Trust, which reaffirmed that religious objects in the trust deed disentitle the assessee from registration under section 80G of the Act, regardless of actual religious expenditure. Accordingly, the Commissioner held that the assessee trust violated the conditions laid down in section 80G(5)(ii

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

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

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

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

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

ii) shall also apply in case of all pending applications under clause (iii) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or sub-clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A or under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, as the case

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

ii) i.e. 30.06.2024. 5. It is also clarified that if any existing trust, institution or fund who had failed to file Form No. 10A for A Y 2022-23 within the due date as extended by the CBDT circular no. 6/2023 dated 24.05.2023 and subsequently, applied for provisional registration as a new trust, institution or fund and has received Form

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

trust is not charitable in nature as per section 80G(5) of Income-tax Act, 1961. Also explain that as to how there is no violation of the section 80G(5B) of the Act read with clause (ii

SHREE VARDHMAN SAMAJ UTKARSH FUND,SABARKANTHA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

charitable purposes, and had not responded to the final notice issued, the CIT(Exemptions) held that the applicant violated the conditions under section 80G(5)(ii), 80G(5)(iii), and Explanation 3 to section 80G of the Act. As a result, the trust

RAJVEE FOUNDATION,PATAN vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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.438/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : N.A Rajvee Foundation, The Commissioner Of 8, Yash Kutir Society, बनाम/ Income Tax, V/S. Padamnath Chikadi, (Exemption), Patan-384265. Ahmedabad (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaetr6780Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kunal P Sanghvi, 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 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(E)”] Dated 26.12.2024, Passed Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Whereby The Assessee’S Application In Form No. 10Ab For Approval Under Section 80G Was Rejected & The Provisional Approval Earlier Granted Was Cancelled. Rajvee Foundation Vs. Cit(E) Assessment Year N.A 2 Facts Of The Case

trust is eligible for approval under section 80G(5) of the Act. Rajvee Foundation Vs. CIT(E) Assessment Year N.A 5 10. Section 80G(5)(ii) requires that the institution or fund should be established in India for “charitable

JAYSHREE GOPALLALJI HAVELI CHARITABLE TRUST-UJALVAV,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.220/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : Na Jayshree Gopallalji Haveli The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Charitable Trust-Ujalvav Ahmedabad – 380 015 V/S. At Ujalvav, Umrala Bhavnagar – 364 290 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaetj 3303 P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Balani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr

section 80G(5) of the Act. Since the trust deed contained religious objects and was thus of a religious-cum-charitable nature, it violated clause (ii

THE BARODA LAKKAD PITHA PUNCH PROPERTY BARODA,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

80G(5), stating that the trust had not claimed exemption under section 11 or section 12 in any preceding year. 4. The CIT(Exemption), after issuing notices and granting opportunities of hearing on 24.04.2024, 30.04.2024, 08.07.2024, and 22.07.2024, rejected both applications by separate orders dated 27.07.2024. In the order rejecting the application under section 12AB, the CIT(Exemption) recorded that

THE BARODA LAKKAD PITHA PUNCH PROPERTY BARODA,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

80G(5), stating that the trust had not claimed exemption under section 11 or section 12 in any preceding year. 4. The CIT(Exemption), after issuing notices and granting opportunities of hearing on 24.04.2024, 30.04.2024, 08.07.2024, and 22.07.2024, rejected both applications by separate orders dated 27.07.2024. In the order rejecting the application under section 12AB, the CIT(Exemption) recorded that

SHREE LAXMINARAYAN EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEADABAD vs. THE CTI(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 80G(5)(iii) instead of 80G(5)(ii) and to pass orders accordingly. The Ld. A.R. further relied upon a judgment passed by the Calcutta Bench in ITA No. 994/Kol/2023. Such submission made by the Ld. A.R. has not been controverted by the Ld. D.R. with all his fairness. Shree Laxminarayan Education And Charitable Trust

SHREE BIPIN BIHARIDAS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 80G(5) and accordingly, impugned application was required to made under clause (iii) of first proviso instead of clause (ii) of first proviso. 3. Ld. CIT (Exemption) ought to have considered the fact that filing an application under wrong clause of proviso does not alter the objects or activities of trust and its procedural error or technical error

SHREE SMASTA GURJAR KSHATRIYA KADIYA SAMAJ NA vs. ARI,NAVSARIVS.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(EXEMPTION) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABD

In the result, the matter is restored to the file of Ld

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

charitable trust. Also it has violated the provision of clause (ii) of sub-section (5) of section 80G of the act and hence

VAISHNAV SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

charitable purposes, and the assessee was allowed to incur up to 5% of expenditure on religious activities.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "80G(5)(ii)", "80G(5)(iii)", "80G(5B)", "Explanation 3 to section 80G" ], "issues": "Whether the inclusion of running temples in the trust

SWAMI SUNYANAND JANSEVA TRUST,BANASKANTHA vs. THE CIT-EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Trust. …..” 7. The provisions of sec 80G(5) stipulates that the said section applies to any donation or 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 and if it fulfils other conditions mentioned therein. The provisions of sec 80G(5