ANKUR FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 1(1), MUMBAI

1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 17.02.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre / CIT(A), Mumbai for the assessment year 2022- 23.

As per the facts of the case, the assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act by the CPC, wherein a demand was raised by disallowing exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act on account of the fact that assessee’s 12A/80G registration number mentioned in the return of income was not matching with the record of the department and the audit report in form 10B was not filed one month prior to the due date for furnishing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act.

The assessee had contested both the reasons before Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed replies but the same were rejected by holding that since form 10B was not filed within the stipulated time and was filed delayed and further held that mere uploading without e-verification does not constitute valid filing. Consequently, other ground regarding registration number issued was also rejected by holding that since there is ‘no form’ on time filed by the assessee.

Now before us, order dated 13.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(E) has been placed on record which shows that delay in filing form 10B has been condoned. Since this order of Ld. CIT(E) is having direct bearing upon the merits of the case of the assessee, and was not before Ld. CIT(A) at the time of deciding the appeal, therefore be that as it may we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met in case the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the issue afresh on merits after taking into consideration the order dated 13.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A), thereby condoning the delay in filing form 10B. Thus we order accordingly. Needless to mention that Ld. CIT(A) shall provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the parties before adjudicating the issues on merits.

Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.

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