THE SORABJEE NUSSERWANJEE PARUCK PARSI POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE,SURAT vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

5)(iii) of the Act by illegal and improper application of the\nprovisions contained under sub-section (5B) to Section 80G of the Income Tax\nAct and hence, the order passed in Form No. 10AD is liable to be struck down.\n(3) Your appellant further reverse it's rights to add, alter, amend or modify any\nof the aforesaid

FIRST DASTUR MAHERJI RANA TRUST FUND,SURAT vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income-tax Act. The trusts are stated to be old and operating under the banner \"Parsi Panchayat\". The delay in filing the appeals was 56 days, attributed to the previous Chartered Accountant. The Revenue did not oppose the condonation

THE SORABJI BURJORJI DASTUR DARAB PAAHALANA TRUST FUND,SURAT vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, these 4 appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

5)(iii) of the Act by illegal and improper application of the\nprovisions contained under sub-section (5B) to Section 80G of the Income Tax\nAct and hence, the order passed in Form No. 10AD is liable to be struck down.\n(3) Your appellant further reverse it's rights to add, alter, amend or modify any\nof the aforesaid

SHRI SARVAJAINK GANPATI USTAV FUND HIRA MENTION NA vs. ARI,NAVSARIVS.CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1273/Srt/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Sri Sarvajaink Ganpati Ustav Commissioner Of Income-Tax बनाम/ Fund Hira Mention Navsari, (Exemption), Ahmedabad-380 014 Vs. Hira Mention Chawl, Vijalpore Road, Siddhivinayak Road, Navsari-396 445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacts 3822 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 15/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/08/2025

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant electronically filed an application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub section (5) of section 80G

AADIVASI SAMPSABHA CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee/applicant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A. 4. That the appellant humbly submits that the learned CIT(Exemption) failed to consider the charitable nature of the trust's activities which includes distribution of foods, cloths & education kit to orphan children and poor people and that the rejection order is contrary to the principle of natural justice

AADIVASI SAMPSABHA CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) , AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee/applicant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A. 4. That the appellant humbly submits that the learned CIT(Exemption) failed to consider the charitable nature of the trust's activities which includes distribution of foods, cloths & education kit to orphan children and poor people and that the rejection order is contrary to the principle of natural justice

SHAH MANILAL MOTILAL KHADAYTA,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 244/Srt/2025 (Hybrid Hearing) Shah Manilal Motilal Commissioner Of Income-Tax बनाम/ Khadayta Chhatralay & (Exemption), Ahmedabad, Aayakar Vs. Bhuvan Mandal Gurjar Bhawan (Vejalpur), Near Sachin Ealiya, Contractor Ni Sheri, Tower, 100 Foot Ring Road, Haripura, Surat-395 003 Anandnagar-Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad-380 015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aants 1271 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 80G(5)(iii) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘in short, the Act’) in absence of valid registration certificate u/s 12A of the Act. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for the appeals are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income

SHREE SURAT SOUTH JARI MANDAL,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHEMDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.246 & 245/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2025-26) (Hybrid Hearing) Shree Surat South Jari Mandal, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), B-2271, Gopipura, Parsiwad, Ahmedabad Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts8551K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Aashish Pophare, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing the appeal of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, the assessee stated that CIT(E) has passed order u/s 250 of the Act on 02.09.2024. The appeal filed before this Tribunal was required to be filed within 60 days

SHREE SURAT SOUTH JARI MANDAL,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.246 & 245/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2025-26) (Hybrid Hearing) Shree Surat South Jari Mandal, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), B-2271, Gopipura, Parsiwad, Ahmedabad Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavts8551K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Aashish Pophare, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing the appeal of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, the assessee stated that CIT(E) has passed order u/s 250 of the Act on 02.09.2024. The appeal filed before this Tribunal was required to be filed within 60 days

GOODWILL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.427 & 426/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing) Goodwill Foundation Charitable Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Trust, Ahmedabad A 102, Sky Heaven Ved Gurukul Road Ved, Surat - 395004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadtg9648P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Harikrishna Gohil, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

5. We have heard both parties on this preliminary issue and find that the delay of 90 and 86 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delays would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing

GOODWILL FOUNATION CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.427 & 426/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing) Goodwill Foundation Charitable Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Trust, Ahmedabad A 102, Sky Heaven Ved Gurukul Road Ved, Surat - 395004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadtg9648P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Harikrishna Gohil, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

5. We have heard both parties on this preliminary issue and find that the delay of 90 and 86 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delays would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing

JAINAM CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.174 & 175/Srt/2025 (Hybrid Hearing) Jainam Charitable Trust, Vs. The Cit (Exemption), 02, Samta Bunglows, Nehru Nagar Ahmedabad Dumas Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaetj2070K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2025

5. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. We find that the delay of 48 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing. 6. Brief facts

JAINAM CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.174 & 175/Srt/2025 (Hybrid Hearing) Jainam Charitable Trust, Vs. The Cit (Exemption), 02, Samta Bunglows, Nehru Nagar Ahmedabad Dumas Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaetj2070K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2025

5. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. We find that the delay of 48 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing. 6. Brief facts

PAREEK VIKAS TRUST-SURAT,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

condoned the delay in filing appeal (ITA No. 393/Srt/2025) by 694 days, and the appeal heard on merit. We further note that both the parties are agree having regarded to the interest of justice, an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(E). We set aside the order

PAREEK VIKAS TRUST-SURAT,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

condoned the delay in filing appeal (ITA No. 393/Srt/2025) by 694 days, and the appeal heard on merit. We further note that both the parties are agree having regarded to the interest of justice, an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(E). We set aside the order

SHARDABEN ARJANBHAI DHOLAKIYA WELFARE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1306 To 1308/Srt/2024 (Physical Hearing) Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Welfare Trust, Ahmedabad B-8, Vallabhnagar Society, Opp – Baroda Pristage Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdts8099R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee ITA Nos.1306 to1308/SRT/2024 Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya has filed an affidavit for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the CIT(E) rejected approval u/s 80G(5) on the ground that application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) was rejected vide order dated

SHARDABEN ARJANBHAI DHOLAKIYA WELFARE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1306 To 1308/Srt/2024 (Physical Hearing) Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Welfare Trust, Ahmedabad B-8, Vallabhnagar Society, Opp – Baroda Pristage Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdts8099R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee ITA Nos.1306 to1308/SRT/2024 Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya has filed an affidavit for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the CIT(E) rejected approval u/s 80G(5) on the ground that application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) was rejected vide order dated

SHARDABEN ARJANBHAI DHOLAKIYA WELFARE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1306 To 1308/Srt/2024 (Physical Hearing) Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Welfare Trust, Ahmedabad B-8, Vallabhnagar Society, Opp – Baroda Pristage Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdts8099R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee ITA Nos.1306 to1308/SRT/2024 Shardaben Arjanbhai Dholakiya has filed an affidavit for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the CIT(E) rejected approval u/s 80G(5) on the ground that application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) was rejected vide order dated