M/S. PRABHA SAMAJIK SHAIKSHANIK MAHILA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

An application for seeking adjournment has been filed by the assessee. However, on going through the same, we notice that no plausible reason has been mentioned by the assessee for seeking adjournment. Therefore, we see no reasons for further adjournment and hence the said application stands dismissed. From the records we notice that there is a delay of 135 days in filing the present appeal. In this regard, an application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee.

After having heard the arguments of both the parties on the application for seeking condonation of delay and considering the entire factual position as explained before us and also keeping in view the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector V MSG Kitji and others AIR 1987 page 1353 (SC), wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitied against technicalities of non-deliberate delay, then in that eventuality & 2443/MUM/2025 M/s. Prabha Samajik Shaikshanik Mahila Mandal substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence, considering the explanation put fourth by the assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay, which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression 'sufficient cause' liberally, we condone the delay in filing the present appeal before us and consequently the delay is condoned and the appeal is registered to be heard on merits.

From the records we noticed that the application for seeking registration by the assessee was rejected on the ground that assessee could not comply with the notices issued by CIT(Exemptions) for furnishing the required documents.

Although both the parties have put fourth their respective submissions, but be that as it may and without going into the merits of the subject matter we are of the view that interest of justice would be met in case, the lis between the parties is decided on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Therefore, considering the said principles in mind, we restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(Exemptions) for deciding it afresh on merits after providing one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee, subject to cost of Rs. 2000 to be deposited by the assessee in Prime Minster relief funds and copy of receipts regarding deposit of the said amount be placed on the file of Ld. CIT(Exemptions) within 15 days from the date of the receipt of & 2443/MUM/2025 M/s. Prabha Samajik Shaikshanik Mahila Mandal this order. Thereafter CIT(Exemptions) shall decide the issue afresh. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on ground and shall be corporative during the grounds of the proceeding.

Before parting, we make it clear, that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by CIT(Exemptions) independently in accordance with law.

As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to (except variance in figures) and the decision rendered in above paragraph would apply mutatis mutandis for these appeals also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the present appeals also stands allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on open court 24.07.2025.