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

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. 12. Further, we also observe that recently vide Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 CBDT has further extended

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)

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. 12. Further, we also observe that very recently vide Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 CBDT has further extended

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

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. 12. Further, we also observe that very recently vide Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 CBDT has further extended

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

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. 12. Further, we also observe that very recently vide Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 CBDT has further extended

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

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. 12. Further, we also observe that very recently vide Circular No. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024 CBDT has further extended

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

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

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

SAMADARSHAN TRUST,GANDHINAGAR 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

condonation of delay of 109 days in filing the appeal against the order rejecting approval under section Samadarshan Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst.Year –N.A. - 2– 80G(5)(iv

RABDI VIBHAG PROGRESSIVE KELAVNI MANDAL,VALSAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

iv) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80 G of the Act. 17. Therefore, in this ambiguity situation in circular No.8/2022 of CBDT dated 31.03.2022 and latest Circular No.6/2023 dated 24.05.2023, of the CBDT, we do not have any option but to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB, u/s 80G

AKSHAT EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST,ANAND vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

section 80G(5)(iv)(B).\nITA No.456/Ahd/2025\nAkshat Education and Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E)\n Assessment Year N.A\n2\nCondonation of Delay\n2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the present\nappeal. As per the Registry, the appeal has been filed with a delay of 119\ndays beyond the prescribed limitation period

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

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].

iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G vide URN: AACTJ8121DF20218 is hereby cancelled.” 4. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(E) rejecting the application filed by the assessee-Trust. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee-trust was earlier granted provisional approval

SENIOR CITIZEN COUNCIL GANDHINAGAR,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

80G(5)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. There was a delay of 109 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason of delay. It has been submitted that the assessee and its trustees were not ITA No.362/Ahd/2025 [Senior Citizen Council Gandhinagar

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

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

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

Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The Registry has noted delay in filing of the present appeal by 87 days. The assessee has filed an application seeking [Vidyarthi Ashram vs. CIT(E)] - 2 – condonation of delay stating on oath, by way of an affidavit, that the delay was attributable to the fact

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

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

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

Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). ITA No. 368/Ahd/2025 [The Gandhinagar Ayyapa Pooja Samiti vs. CIT(E)] - 2 – 2. The Registry has noted delay in filing of the present appeal by 109 days. The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay stating on oath, by way of an affidavit, that

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

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

delay of 109 days is condoned on due consideration of facts of assessee’s case and owing to causing no perceptible prejudice to other side. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed an application in Form 10AB on 23.02.2024 for approval under section 80G(5)(iv

M. P. CHAUDHARY CHARITABLE TRUST,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered charitable trust and had made an application for approval u/s 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the Act by filing Form No. 10AB electronically. The ld. CIT(Exemption) observed that in order to avail the benefit of section

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

delay of one day is condoned in the interest of substantial justice. Facts of the Case 3. The assessee is a public charitable trust, originally established on 05.12.1952 under the name “Baroda Lakadpitha Panch Property” and registered with the Charity Commissioner, Baroda under the Bombay Public Trusts Act. Subsequently, vide order dated 20.03.2013 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara

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

delay of one day is condoned in the interest of substantial justice. Facts of the Case 3. The assessee is a public charitable trust, originally established on 05.12.1952 under the name “Baroda Lakadpitha Panch Property” and registered with the Charity Commissioner, Baroda under the Bombay Public Trusts Act. Subsequently, vide order dated 20.03.2013 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara

SHREE SATSANGI SAKET DHAM RAM ASHRAM,MEHSANA 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

condoned /ignored by the Ld. CIT(E) having regard to the eligibility of the assessee for such grant. In fact, that is the sole reason the Ld. A.R. is praying for remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction upon him to treat the said application under Section 80G(5)(iii) instead of 80G