DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act on the same day i.e. 19.12.2005 in Form No.10G under Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. An application for condonation of delay

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act on the same day i.e. 19.12.2005 in Form No.10G under Rule 11AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. An application for condonation of delay

ROOP V K JAIN FOUNDATION,MEWAT vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

condone the delay and decide the appeal on its merits. 5. While reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Ld. AR submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has not considered the information / evidence brought on record in correct prospective and denied the registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. 6. In the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that assessee

PRACHEEN SHRI AGGARWAL DIGAMBER JAIN PANCHAYAT DELHI,DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed as indicated above for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

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

FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF MICRO ENTERPRISES,GURUGRAM vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statical purpose

Bench: Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhvs. Cit(Exemptions), Foundation For Advancement Of Micro Chandigarh Enterprises, Unit No. 701 To 711, 7Th Floor, Unitech Commercial, Tower 2, Sector-45, Gurugram, Haryana- 122003 Pan :Aadcf6999F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh Wadhwa, Fca Department By Shri Surender Pal, Cit, Dr

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

TEN SMILES FOUNDATION,FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act vide impugned order, prima-facie, is solely due to non-compliance of notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). Aggrieved, the assessee filed this appeal. 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR prayed for condonation of the delay

CHURCH'S AUXILIARY FOR SOCIAL ACTION,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Condonation of delay as per section 80G(5C)(v) of the IT Act. Consequently, the amount claimed as per Form 10AA was treated as deemed income of the society for A.Y 2004-05. 5

DELHI AGROHA VIKAS TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(E) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Kant

5. The following case laws are relied upon in this regard- (I). Ajmeer Sheriff and co. 375 ITR 15 (Madras High Court), wherein the Tribunal haddeclined to condone delay for reasons that i) allegation regarding ill-health of managing partner and multiple medical complications was bereft of details and every day's delay had not been explained, and ii) even

DELHI AGROHA VIKAS TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(E) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Kant

5. The following case laws are relied upon in this regard- (I). Ajmeer Sheriff and co. 375 ITR 15 (Madras High Court), wherein the Tribunal haddeclined to condone delay for reasons that i) allegation regarding ill-health of managing partner and multiple medical complications was bereft of details and every day's delay had not been explained, and ii) even

SHRI BANKE BIHARI GAUSHALA SOCIETY,BALLABGARH vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

SHRI BANKE BIHARI GAUSHALA SOCIETY,BALLABGARH vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

SAT SHREE LALJI MISSION CHARITABLE TRUST,FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

SAT SHREE LALJI MISSIONJ CHARITABLE TRUST,FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

ACIT, CIRCLE- 32(1), NEW DELHI vs. WINDLASS STEEL CRAFTS LLP, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

ARTEMIS EDUCATION & RESEARCH FOUNDATION,GURGAON vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

80G of the Act respectively moved by the Appellant/Applicant being a Trust registered under Societies Registration Act has been rejected by ld. CIT(E) on the ground that the prime intent of the applicant is to pursue only medical research which is not covered under the term ‘education’. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant has come up before the Tribunal

ARTEMIS EDUCATION & RESEARCH FOUNDATION ,GURGAON vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

80G of the Act respectively moved by the Appellant/Applicant being a Trust registered under Societies Registration Act has been rejected by ld. CIT(E) on the ground that the prime intent of the applicant is to pursue only medical research which is not covered under the term ‘education’. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant has come up before the Tribunal

MATA PARMESHWARI CHARITABLE TRUST,BAGHPAT, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2025-26 Mata Parmeshwari Charitable Vs. Cit (Exemption), Trust, Lucknow. Siddh Guru Sthan Neelkanth Ashram, Jewane Guliyan, Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh – 250345, Pan: Aabtm1609A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Baldev Raj & Shri Manish Upneja, Advocates Revenue By : Ms Pooja Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

5) of section 80G.” 3.1 On 09.08.2024, this application was rejected through Form 10AD and when the assessee came to know of the inadvertent mistake, fresh application was filed on 29.08.2024 in Form 10AB which was rejected on 26.03.2025 by the impugned order holding that application is beyond the time line and is not maintainable

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

section BOG(5)(vr) of tl're Act ott tlte satne ilay ie. 19 122005 in Form No 10G under Rule llAA otthe lnoonte'fax l{Lrles, 1962 An application for condonation of delay in seeking approval under sectiotts l24 arril 80G