BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

51 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10A(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai96Delhi88Mumbai71Hyderabad60Kolkata57Ahmedabad51Raipur44Bangalore44Pune39Jaipur37Visakhapatnam14Chandigarh11Rajkot9Cochin8Surat7Amritsar5Cuttack5Guwahati5Lucknow5Nagpur4Patna4Jodhpur3Agra3Calcutta2Telangana2Varanasi2Indore2Karnataka2Allahabad1Jabalpur1SC1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 12A117Section 80G(5)85Section 80G82Exemption46Section 1134Section 12A(1)(ac)25Section 80G(5)(iii)18Section 80G(5)(iv)18Section 2(15)

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

ITA 435/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-D.R
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

condone delay in filing form No 10AB for approval under section 80G(5) of the Act 7. Appellant craves leave to add, alter on delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal” I.T.A No. 435/Ahd/2024 A.Y. N.A. Page No. 3 The Navsari Agricultural University vs. CIT (E) 3. The brief facts

Showing 1–20 of 51 · Page 1 of 3

18
Condonation of Delay14
Limitation/Time-bar12
Charitable Trust11

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/AHD/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Darshak M Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

delayed by almost about 2.5 months from the extended date. The Tribunal considered this issue and finally in para 6.1 noted and the relevant reads as under:- There is no dispute as to the fact that assessee is provisionally registered till A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 27.10.2021. Thus it has complied with section 80G(5). The proviso to this

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

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

ITA 734/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri H Phani, CIT. DRFor Respondent: Shri H Phani, CIT. DR
Section 10Section 80Section 80FSection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

condoning the delay, if such provision is provided in the Act while considering any issue for adjudication. Therefore, considering the above proposition, we are of the view that Id. CIT (Exemption) has rightly rejected the application of the assessee for grant of approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. All these three appeals are rejected

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

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

ITA 798/AHD/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Vepari, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

delayed by almost about 2.5 months from the extended date. The Tribunal considered this issue and finally in para 6.1 noted and the relevant reads as under:- There is no dispute as to the fact that assessee is provisionally registered till A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 27.10.2021. Thus it has complied with section 80G(5). The proviso to this

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

ITA 1000/AHD/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Ms.Himali Mistry, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

delayed by almost about 2.5 months from the extended date. The Tribunal considered this issue and finally in para 6.1 noted and the relevant reads as under:- There is no dispute as to the fact that assessee is provisionally registered till A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 27.10.2021. Thus it has complied with section 80G(5). The proviso to this

ADANI EDUCATION FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 859/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar & Shri Parin ShahFor Respondent: Fr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R
Section 80Section 80G

condonation of delay in fling of present application. The DR submitted that approaching ITAT for relief for grant of extension of timeline is not the correct course of action, looking into the instant set of facts. The DR placed reliance on the observation made by CIT(Exemptions) in the order rejecting the application for grant of final registration under Section

ADANI KINDERGARTEN EDUCATION FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 860/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar & Shri Parin ShahFor Respondent: Fr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R
Section 80Section 80G

condonation of delay in fling of present application. The DR submitted that approaching ITAT for relief for grant of extension of timeline is not the correct course of action, looking into the instant set of facts. The DR placed reliance on the observation made by CIT(Exemptions) in the order rejecting the application for grant of final registration under Section

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

ITA 428/AHD/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jun 2024AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Pala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 12ASection 80(5)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

delayed by almost about 2.5 months from the extended date. The Tribunal considered this issue and finally in para 6.1 noted and the relevant reads as under:- There is no dispute as to the fact that assessee is provisionally registered till A.Y. 2024-25 vide order dated 27.10.2021. Thus it has complied with section 80G(5). The proviso to this

RANDHEJA DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 649/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt. Year : 2017-18 Randheja Dudh Utpadak The Ito, Ward-3 Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Vs Now Ward-1 To-Randheja Gandhinagar. Tal: Gandhinagar Pin : 382 620 Pan : Aacar 5164 K (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short Referred To As Ld.Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 22.11.2021 Pertaining To Asst.Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Notified That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By Limitation By 581 Days. In Order To Explain The Reasons For The Impugned Delay, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Cit(A)/Nfac Order Was Passed Against The Assessee On 22.11.2021. However, Due To Covid-19 Pandemic Limitation For Filing Appeal Before The Court Of Law Was Extended Till February, 2022. Therefore, After Expiry Of The Limitation For Filing Of The Appeal On Feb., 2022, The Assessee Was Required To File Appeal Within 60 Days Of The Same I.E. By April, 2022. But The Assessee Could File The Appeal On

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 250

condone the impugned delay of 581 days in filing appeal ITA No.649 /Ahd/2023 5 before the Tribunal, and proceed to take up the appeal of the assessee for adjudication on merit. 7. The grievance of the assessee against the impugned order are given in the grounds of appeal, which read as under: “1. That on facts

SAMADARSHAN TRUST,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 367/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Aug 2025

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

delay of 109 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed an application electronically in Form 10AB seeking approval under sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of the first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). The Commissioner (Exemptions) examined the application

VIDYARTHI ASHRAM,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 425/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 May 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR
Section 12ASection 5Section 80GSection 80G(5)

condoning the delay of 87 days and admitting the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that his solitary contention against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) rejecting assessee’s application seeking approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act, was that the assessee had inadvertently mentioned the incorrect clause of Section 80G(5

THE GANDHINAGAR AYYAPA POOJA SAMITI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 368/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aashish Rajesh Rewar, CIT. DR
Section 12ASection 5Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iv)

condoning the delay of 109 days and admitting the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. ITA No. 368/Ahd/2025 [The Gandhinagar Ayyapa Pooja Samiti vs. CIT(E)] - 5 – 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that his solitary contention against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) rejecting assessee’s application seeking approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act, was that

JAN AROGYA SEVA TRUST,VALSAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 169/AHD/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2024

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: - Jan Arogya Seva Trust Valsad, Vs. Commissioner Of Palihill 4, Bhagdawada, Income-Tax (Exemption), Valsad, Gujarat-396001 Ahmedabad Pan : Aactj 8121 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" यथ" Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Siddhartha Nautiyal: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(E)" For Short] Dated 12.08.2023, Rejecting The Application Of The Assessee Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short].

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

condone the delay in filing Form No. 10A/10AB, as the same could not be filed in such cases within the last extended date, i.e., 30.09.2023. 3. On consideration of the matter, with a view to avoid and mitigate genuine hardship in such cases, the Board, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119 of the Act, hereby extends

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 333/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

JT.CIT(E),CIRCLE -2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 334/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 342/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 343/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

JT.CIT(E), CIRCLE-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 335/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 344/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 22

condoning the delay was not correctly exercised by the Commissioner Income Tax. 15.1 Similarly co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case ITO -Vs- Ramji Mandir Religious And Charitable Trust reported in (2023) 69 CCH 0288 Ahd Trib distinguished the Apex Court judgement and held as follows: I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page

JITO BHAVNAGAR CHAPTER FOUNDATION,BHAVANAGAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 103/AHD/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2024

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)Section 80G(5)(viv)

delay in filing application. 3. The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed application for final approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act in Form No. 10AB on Jito Bhavnagar Chapter Foundation