MANKIKHUSHI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

P a g e | 1 ITA No.1829/JPR/2025 Mankikhushi Foundation IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,“A” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1829/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2025-26) Mankikhushi Foundation Vs. CIT F.No. G-16 4th Floor, P.N. Exemption Jaipur, Karani Kripa Maa Jaipur Hinglaj Panchyawala, Jaipur 302034 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AARCM5707C Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Yogesh Kr. Sharma, Adv Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT

Date of Hearing 25.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 26.05.2026 O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)(hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(E)”) dated 28.09.2025rejecting the application of the assessee for final/regular approval u/s 80h(5)of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”).

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1829/JPR/2025 Mankikhushi Foundation 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of Ld. CIT(E) to submit that the same is an ex-parte order. Further, the appeal is time barred by12 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed wherein it has been pleaded that the notice of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(E) were not received by the assessee. Hence, the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the Ld. CIT(E) and further resulting into the delay in filing the present appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits and that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(E). 4. In our view, the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(E). The impugned order of Ld. CIT(E) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for decision afresh. 5. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 26/05/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Ratnesh Nandan Sahay) (Sanjay Garg) Accountant member Judicial Member

Dated 26.05.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS

P a g e | 3 ITA No.1829/JPR/2025 Mankikhushi Foundation