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.

8 results for “condonation of delay”+ Charitable Trustclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai491Mumbai400Ahmedabad320Pune282Bangalore207Jaipur187Delhi175Kolkata155Karnataka132Hyderabad99Cuttack50Surat50Chandigarh49Amritsar46Indore45Lucknow42Rajkot34Nagpur32Cochin32Visakhapatnam30Patna23Jodhpur19Raipur18Agra17Jabalpur8Ranchi8Guwahati5Allahabad5Panaji5Varanasi5Calcutta3Dehradun2SC2Himachal Pradesh2Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 12A21Section 1110Section 143(1)10Section 80G(5)10Exemption8Section 80G(5)(iii)6Charitable Trust4Condonation of Delay3Addition to Income

SPARSH ASSOCIATION OF DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONALS & CONSULTANTS,REWA vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, REWA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 105/JAB/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 Sept 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri.SapanUsrethe.Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta.Sr.DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234C

condoning the delay in filing Form No.10B along with the return filed. In the decision of this Court in Sarvodaya Charitable Trust

RAI SAHAB BHAIYALAL DUBEY EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

3
Section 80G2
Section 119(2)(b)2
Limitation/Time-bar2

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/JAB/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(1)

Charitable & Chaleshwar Temple Trust vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1994] 207 ITR 368 (Bombay)/[1994] 118 CTR 305 (Bombay)[16-09-1993]. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) and requested that the same may be upheld. 6. We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case

SHRI NAMIYUN PARSWANATH JAIN, SWETAMBER MANIDHARI TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes”

ITA 100/JAB/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 Sept 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sri Rahul Bardia.CA. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154

condonation of delay in filling the Sri Namiyun Paraswanath Jain Swetamber Manidhari Trust. Jabalpur . Form.No.10B and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Honble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in not considering the facts that

SARIPUTTA CHARITABLE TRUST,CHHINDWARA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

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

ITA 127/JAB/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2022-23 Sariputta Charitable Trust V. Commissioner Of Income Khajri Dhimradhan, Tax (Exemption) Chhindwara, 480001. Room No.201, Ii Floor, Reac, Bhopal, 462016, Madhya Pradesh. Pan:Aarts8965K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv Respondent By: None Date Of Hearing: 06 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 01 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: None
Section 12A

Trust v. Commissioner of Income Khajri Dhimradhan, Tax (Exemption) Chhindwara, 480001. Room No.201, II Floor, REAC, Bhopal, 462016, Madhya Pradesh. PAN:AARTS8965K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv Respondent by: None Date of hearing: 06 01 2025 Date of pronouncement: 07 01 2025 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, filed

ATHITHEYAM NYAS,ANUPPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL,, BHOPAL

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

ITA 107/JAB/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2025

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.-Na Athitheyam Nyas, Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax C/O Kalyan Sewa Ashram, Amraknatk (Exemption), Bhopal Dt-Anuppur, M.P. 484886 Pan:Aakta1783A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. P.C. Bardia & Sh. Rahul Bardia, C.As. Revenue By: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit (Exemption), Bhopal Wherein The Ld. Cit (Exemption) Has Rejected The Application Filed By The Assessee In Form No. 10Ab For Registration Under Section 12B Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That Without Considering The Reply E Filed/Mailed Dated 20.03.2024, The Cit(Exemp) Erred In Cancelling The Provisional Registration Granted On 28.11.2023 & Rejecting 10Ab Form For Permanent Registration Vide Order Dated 21.03.2025 Due To Non-Submission Of Reply To Notice Dated 13.03.2025 Up To 18.03.2025 Alleging: - 1. Failure To Explain The Reason For Delay In Filling Form 10Ab Without Considering Fresh/Corrected 10Ab Form Filed On 18.03.2025 U/S 12A(Ac)(1)(Vi)(B) Under New Law. 2. Not Justifying Dissolution Clause No. 23 Allowing Use Of Funds By The Settlors/Trustees- Without Referring Clause No. 19,20, 21 & 22 Of The Trust Deed. 3. The Trust Is Irrevocable- Not Correct-Without Referring Irrevocable Clause No. 19 Of The Trust Deed.

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Bardia & Sh. Rahul Bardia, C.AsFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 12B

delay of 84 days ought to have been condoned as provided u/s 12(A)(vi) proviso Relied on Grow Foundation case- ITA No. 734/Ahd/2024 order dated 10.09.2024 ITA No. 113/PUN/2024-Birmani Charitable trust

LATE SMT SAMPAT BAI JAIN SMRITI SAMITI RUPESH JAIN ABHINAV X RAY, M G ROAD SATNA,SATNA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTION WARD, JABALPUR(M.P), JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 35/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur31 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 119(2)(b)

charitable trust, directed against the Order under section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 15/03/2022, refusing to condone the delay

MANGALAYATAN UNIVERSITY,MANDLA ROAD, NEAR SHARDA DEVI MANDIR, RICHAI BAREL vs. LD. CIT (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH

In the result, ITA No. 46/JAB/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

ITA 25/JAB/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. V. Rajkumar, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

delay may kindly be condoned as it was caused due to reasonable and sufficient cause. 3. We have duly considered the matter. As the issue is the grant of approval under section 80G, which emanates out of a common order, it is plausible that the same could lead to a belief that a separate appeal was not necessary. Hence, considering

MANGALAYATAN UNIVERSITY,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXCEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA No. 46/JAB/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

ITA 46/JAB/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2025

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. V. Rajkumar, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

delay may kindly be condoned as it was caused due to reasonable and sufficient cause. 3. We have duly considered the matter. As the issue is the grant of approval under section 80G, which emanates out of a common order, it is plausible that the same could lead to a belief that a separate appeal was not necessary. Hence, considering