2025 (7) TMI 1438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds of appeal: "[1] In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad rejecting application for registration of the trust u/s. 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is void ab initio and in violation of principles of natural justice hence being bad in law. [2] In law and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case of appellant, the Id. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in rejecting application for registration of the trust u/s. 80G(5) & u/s. 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of incorrect reasons/observations. [2.1] In law and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case of appellant, the Id. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad has erred in not gran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se was in excess of the prescribed limit of 5% in one year i.e. in A.Y. 2021-22 only but on that basis the Ld. CIT(E) was not correct in cancelling the provisional registration for the entire period from 04.04.2022 to AY 2024-25. The Ld. AR requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity to produce the documents and the clarifications by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E). 4. Per Contra Shri Alpesh Parmar, Ld. CIT. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). 5. We have considered the submissions of the assessee and also gone through the documents brought on record in the paper book. The assessee is a very old trust incorporated on 15/09/1953. As per Form 10AB the objects of the trust included religious, preser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed at the conclusion that the religious expense for F.Y. 2023-24 exceeded the limit of 5%. The assessee was allowed time of only three days to respond to the show cause notice dated 09/12/2024. The assessee had sought time to comply to the show cause notice and a copy of the online acknowledgement in this regard has been brought on record. However, it appears that no further compliance was made by the assessee and the application of the assessee was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E). It appears prima facie that the assessee had incurred religious expenses in excess of prescribed limit of 5% in FY 2021-22 only and not in FY 2023-24, as observed by the Ld. CIT(E) in his notice. If so, the rejection of the application and cancellation of the provisio....
 TaxTMI
 TaxTMI  TaxTMI
 TaxTMI  TaxTMI
 TaxTMI