AAROGYA VAHINI TRUST,KOLKATA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION),, KOLKATA

At the outset, we note that the appeals of the assessee are barred by limitation by 568 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did raise objections to the condoning of delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and , hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal as under.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the application in Form 10AB for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act on 24.06.2023. The Ld. CIT(E) issued two notices on 19.10.2023 and 13.11.023, respectively to the assessee in e-mail registered with the department. The said notices were not replied and the application for registration was rejected by the Ld. CIT (Exemption). Pertinent to state that the assessee was already enjoying the registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act granted vide order dated 14.08.2021, from A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the Ld. CIT (E), passed an order ex- parte when the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) on 12.10.2023 and 09.11.2023. Now, the assessee has raised before us the issue that the application was wrongly filed by the assessee in form no.10AB on 24.06.2023, despite the fact that the assessee was already granted provisional registration on 14.08.2021, which was valid from A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27. We have examined the provisional registration granted by the Ld. CIT (E) to the assessee on 24.09.2021, which is extracted as under:-

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed.