KIRITSHREE FOUNDATION,MAHARASHTRA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA

We heard the parties and perused the record. We noticed that the assessee had filed two applications in Form No. 10AB seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Act. On examination of the applications, learned CIT(Exemption) took the view that these applications are not complete and all the documents are required to be furnished were not furnished. Accordingly learned CIT(Exemption), vide his letter dated 18.4.2023, asked the assessee to furnish all the details. The assessee responded to the above said notice and filed its submission

Having heard the rival submissions, we notice that the Ld CIT(E) was constrained to reject the applications of the assessee mainly for the reason that the limitation period for processing the applications is about to expire. We notice that the assessee has responded to the notices issued by Ld CIT(E) and it is not the case that the assessee was lethargic or non- responsive. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the assessee should not be made to suffer on the reasoning that the limitation period for processing the applications of the assessee is about to expire. Accordingly, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to furnish relevant details to the satisfaction of learned CIT(Exemption).

Accordingly, we set aside both the orders passed by learned CIT(Exemption) and restore all the issues to his file with the direction to allow proper opportunity to the assessee to furnish details called for and accordingly process the applications filed by the assessee seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Act in accordance with law.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.