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

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

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)

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

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

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

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

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

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

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

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

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) of the Act. Since both appeals arise from common facts and pertain to the same assessee and since the legal issues involved are interconnected, ITA No.1709 and 1710 /Ahd/2024 2 they were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. Condonation of delay 2. At the outset, it is noted that there

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) of the Act. Since both appeals arise from common facts and pertain to the same assessee and since the legal issues involved are interconnected, ITA No.1709 and 1710 /Ahd/2024 2 they were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. Condonation of delay 2. At the outset, it is noted that there

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)

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

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

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

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

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 on 26.02.2024. From the application it was evident that the assessee trust had commenced

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)(B) of the Income Tax Act. In response

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

delay of 156 days in ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025 and 151 days in ITA No. 324/Ahd/2025 is condoned. Facts of the Case 5. The assessee is a company registered under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and is known as Aruna Kishor Foundation. It is engaged in development work primarily in the tribal and rural areas of Gujarat and Himachal

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

delay of 156 days in ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025 and 151 days in ITA No. 324/Ahd/2025 is condoned. Facts of the Case 5. The assessee is a company registered under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and is known as Aruna Kishor Foundation. It is engaged in development work primarily in the tribal and rural areas of Gujarat and Himachal

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

delay of 156 days in ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025 and 151 days in ITA No. 324/Ahd/2025 is condoned. Facts of the Case 5. The assessee is a company registered under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and is known as Aruna Kishor Foundation. It is engaged in development work primarily in the tribal and rural areas of Gujarat and Himachal

ARUNA KISHORE FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

delay of 156 days in ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025 and 151 days in ITA No. 324/Ahd/2025 is condoned. Facts of the Case 5. The assessee is a company registered under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and is known as Aruna Kishor Foundation. It is engaged in development work primarily in the tribal and rural areas of Gujarat and Himachal

V-ONE SOCIETY,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

condoned on due consideration of facts and owing to smallness of delay causing no perceptible prejudice to other side. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee / applicant trust filed application for approval under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) in Form 10AB under clause (ii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5