SHREE DIYAWAT PATTI JAIN PRAVASI SANGH TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-2, CHENNAI

At the outset, Ld. AR, Mr. Hitesh, Advocate, drew our attention to page No. 8 of the paper book and submits that the assessee, in response to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E), furnished various details listed therein for his consideration vide letter dated 28.3.2026, and without considering the same, Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application filed seeking approval vide impugned order dated 30.3.2026. He submits that while referring to the impugned order, prayed for one more opportunity before the Ld. CIT(E), as the assessee is ready to furnish the mandatory documents as sought by the Ld. CIT(E). Ld. DR, Mr. K. Jayaganesh, CIT, reported no objection.

Having heard both the sides and on perusal of the impugned order at para No. 5, which clearly shows that the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee for non-submission of mandatory documents required for examining the object and genuineness of the activities. Therefore, considering the same, we accept the request of the Ld. AR in remanding the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for his fresh consideration, and assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, order of the Ld. CIT(E) is set aside and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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