SWIFT SAMANTA FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), DELH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding the reasons reasonable. It held that the ld. CIT(E) decided the issue without proper appreciation of facts or affording the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard, thus restoring the matter to the ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an order of the ld. CIT(E) for A.Y 2024-25, which was filed with a delay. The ld. CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's appeal without adjudicating the issues, citing the assessee's failure to prove charitable activities, submit complete details, and non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the ld. CIT(E) was justified in rejecting the assessee's appeal without proper adjudication and opportunity of being heard, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.
CIT(E), New Delhi dated 27.09.2024 for A.Y 2024-25.
The assessee has filed an application and affidavit for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reasons stated by the ld. counsel for the assessee seem to be reasonable. Accordingly, we condone the delay.
At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(E) Officer has decided the issue on the ground that the assessee failed to prove that the activities for charitable purposes are actually being undertaken by it. The ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee has not submitted complete details required vide questionnaire. However, we find that the Ld. CIT(E) has not made any compliance to provisions of section 250(6) of the Act and rejected the appeal of the assessee without adjudicating on the issues at hand.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(E) has decided the issue without appreciation of facts and without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it expedient to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
The ld. CIT(E) is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information /documents as required by the authorities. allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 09.05.2025.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
