AHMEDABAD KADI VIJAPUR PRAGANA SHRIMALI SONI UTTEJAK MANDAL,GANDHINAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD-EXEMPTION, PALANPUR PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-1 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

MA 5/AHD/2026

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Ahmedabad Kadi Vijapur Pragana Shrimali Soni Uttejak Mandal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 04-09-2025. The application sought to address alleged misinterpretations and omissions in the Tribunal's previous order concerning the assessee's eligibility for tax exemptions under sections 12 and 12A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions, concluded that the issues raised were already addressed in the original order and that the application essentially sought a re-evaluation of the Tribunal's findings, which is not allowed under the statutory provisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839490 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Assessee Lawyers: SULABH PADSHAH
• Section: 12A; 12

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Ahmedabad Kadi Vijapur Pragana Shrimali Soni Uttejak Mandal, Plot No. 639/3, Pramukhanand Appt. (Gandhinagar), Sector 22 SO, Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar-382016 PAN: AAATA5903E (Appellant) Vs The ITO, Ward-1(Exemptions) Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sulabh Padshah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 30-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 23-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee in respect of order dated 04-09-2025 passed by the Tribunal. 2. The ld. A.R. submitted that as regards ground no. 1 the Tribunal has mis-interpreted ground no. 1 and has concluded that the assessee’s case was for complete scrutiny and though it is not mentioned in the assessment order. The ld. A.R. M.A. No. 5/Ahd/2026 (In ITA No. 1041/Ahd/2025) Assessment Year 2017-18 Printed from counselvise.com M.A No. 5/Ahd/2026 Ahmedabad Kadi Vijapur Pragana Shrimali Soni Uttejak Mandal, A.Y. 2017-18 2 submitted that the assessee has not claimed any exemption u/s. 12/12AA of the Act hence, the second condition of para 1(v) of guidelines issued dated 20-08-2018 i.e. assessee has been found to be claimed tax exemption/deduction in the return has not been fulfilled in this case. Thus, the ld. A.R. submitted that this is a mistake apparent on record. As regards ground no. 2, the ld. A.R. submitted that the Tribunal has mis-interpreted that whether assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 12A for the year under consideration and accordingly concluded that the assessment was proposed for assessment year 2017-18 and at that stage, the assessee was rightly treated as AOP by the Assessing Officer. The ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee never claimed exemption u/s. 12 of the Act. Thus, the ld. A.R. submitted that this is a mistake apparent on record. As regards ground nos. 3 to 8 the ld. A.R. submitted that the Tribunal has not dealt with these grounds separately and therefore this is a mistake apparent on record. 3. The ld. D.R. submitted that the Tribunal has given a detailed finding related to the arguments placed before the Tribunal at the time of hearing and has given a separate finding for all the grounds. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. As regards to ground no. 1 which was related to the complete scrutiny whether it is a limited scrutiny or complete scrutiny has been answered by the Tribunal and once view has been taken, the contentions of the ld. A.R. at this juncture amounts to review of the order which is not permissible as per section 254 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, first contention of the ld. A.R. does not sustain. As regards Printed from counselvise.com M.A No. 5/Ahd/2026 Ahmedabad Kadi Vijapur Pragana Shrimali Soni Uttejak Mandal, A.Y. 2017-18 3 ground no. 2, the ld. D.R. stated that the assessee never claimed exemption but the assessee has totally ignored that the Tribunal has given the detailed finding in para 11 of the said order dated 04-09-2025. As regards ground nos. 3 to 8, which is a corollary of ground no. 2, the same was answered by the Tribunal and the contentions taken by the A.R. at this juncture are more of a review than the mistake apparent on record. Thus, first, second and third contentions of the ld. A.R. do not sustain as there is no mistake apparent on record in order dated 04-09-2025 passed by the Tribunal. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23-02-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 23/02/2026 a.k. आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील\u0012य अ\u0013धकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "