SURYADEEP RELIGIOUS TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER I.T.O., EXEMPTION WARD 2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The assessee in this case aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(E) dismissing the application of the assessee for registration u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”]. The appeal is time barred by 30 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed. Considering the averments made in the application and also considering the shortness of the delay, the delay in filing of the present appeal is hereby condoned.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld.CIT(E) had called for certain information from the assessee. However, the e-mail sent by the Ld.CIT(E) didn’t come to the notice of the trustees, that thereafter the Ld.CIT(E) proceeded to dismiss the application of the assessee on account of failure of the assessee to furnish the necessary details as called for by the Ld.CIT(E). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that only one opportunity was given by the Ld.CIT(E), which the assessee couldn’t avail owing to the circumstances narrated above. He has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld.CIT(E).

Considering the above submissions of the Ld.AR, in our view, the interests of justice will be served, if, the assessee be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld.CIT(E). Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(E) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) with a direction to decide

With the above observations, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.