CHIRANABIN,PARBAKSHI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU R. L. REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2094/KOL/2026 Assessment Year:(2027-28) Chiranabin, CIT(Exemption), Parbakshi, Khanpur, Bakshi B.O. Vs. Kolkata Howrah – 711303, West Bengal [PAN:AAAAC3200F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri P. K. Ray, Advocate & Shri Trideep Nayak, AR Respondent by: Shri Raman Garg, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 04.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement 01.09.2026 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption),Kolkata(hereinafter referred to as the “ld.CIT(A)”] dated17.03.2026.

ITA No.2094/Kol/2026/A.Y.2027-28 Chiranabin vs. CIT(E) evidences for verification. The ld. CIT(E) has extracted the provisions of the procedure for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) observed that the assessee was granted provisional approval u/s 80G(5)(iv) of the Act and was required to file the application within the prescribed time limit. Despite the CBDT extending the time limit up to 30.06.2024 vide Circular No.7/2024, dated 25.04.2024, the assessee did not file the application within the extended period. The ld. CIT(E) therefore, concluded that the time limits prescribed u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act was mandatory and there was no power to condone the delay, and rejected the application as non-maintainable without examining the merits of the case. 3. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred appeal before us. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that the application of the assessee for grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act was filed on 29.09.2025 in Form No. 10AB under Rule 17A of the IT Rules, 1962. The ld. CIT(E) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide order dated 17.03.2026 on the ground that the application in Form No.10AB was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The ld. AR submitted that similar issue has been decided by this Co-ordinate Bench in cases of (i) Pravat vs. CIT(E), ITA No.1418/Kol/2026, dated 29.07.2026, (ii) Hensla Hara Parbati Club vs. CIT(E), ITA No.1419/Kol/2026, dated 22.07.2026, (iii) Kashipur Ma Sarada Mission vs. CIT(E), ITA No. 1239/Kol/2026, dated 23.07.2026 and (iv) L Dey Road Sarda Society Purulia vs. CIT(E), ITA No.1522/Kol/2026, dated 21.07.2026. The ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the registration u/s 80G of the Act may be granted to the assessee by condoning the delay. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the application filed by the assessee for grant

ITA No.2094/Kol/2026/A.Y.2027-28 Chiranabin vs. CIT(E) of registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act in Form No.10AB was rejected on the ground being filed belatedly, i.e. on 29.09.2025. In the interests of justice and fair play, we hereby condone the delay and restore the issue back for granting of registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act to the file of ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 01/09/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Duvvuru R. L. Reddy) (Rajesh Kumar) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 01/09/2026 SAMANTA आदेश �ȧ ĤǓ�ͧ �ͪ �\ Ē ȯͪ��/Copy of the Order forwardedto: 1. \ �Ȣ�ȡ�ȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×��ȸ/ The Respondent. 3. Ȳ�Ȳͬ��आयकर] �ǕÈ�/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकर] �ǕÈ�(अपील) / The CIT(A) ��ȡ�Ȣ�ĤǓ�Ǔ�ͬ �, आयकर\ �Ȣ�ȣ�\ͬ ����,/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata 5. 6. �ȡ�[ फाईल/ Guard file.

BY ORDER,

// TRUE COPY // Deputy Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata