Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's application for final registration under Section 12A was rejected by the CIT(E). The appeal was filed with a delay of three days due to the office of the authorized representative being closed.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding it to be unintentional and not attributable to the assessee. The case was remanded to the CIT(E) to provide an opportunity for hearing and to pass a detailed order on merit.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the CIT(E) failed to provide an adequate opportunity of being heard before rejecting the application.
Sections Cited
12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA
ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present appeals filed by the assessee arises out of the orders passed by Ld. CIT(E) rejecting the application in form 10 AB seeking final registration for Exemption u/s. 12A and ETG of the Act. 2. At the outset the Ld. AR submitted that, there is a delay of three days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that, the office of the Authorised Representative was closed due to which the appeal could not be filed within the period of limitation. The Ld. AR thus, prayed for the delay to be condoned as it was unintentional and cannot to attributed to the assessee. The application seeking condonation of delay dated 27/03/2025, is placed on record. 2.1. The Ld. DR though, did not support the argument of the assessee could not controvert the fact that the delay is absolutely unintentional. We have perused the submissions of both sides in the light of the record placed before us.
It is noted that, the assessee has made out a reasonable cause for the delay in filing appeal before this Tribunal and is not attributable to assessee. Accordingly, we condone the delay and the application dated 27/03/2025 stands to be allowed.
On merit of the case the Ld. AR submitted that, the Ld. CIT(E) failed to grant opportunity to rectify the defect in the applications and rejected the application without granting an opportunity of being heard. The Ld. AR thus, prayed for an opportunity by requesting to remand issued back to the Ld. CIT(E). The Ld. DR did not object for the matter to be remanded the larger interest of justice.
We accordingly, remitted this issue back to the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to pass detailed on merit, after considering the submissions of assessee. Needless to say that proper opportunity being heard must be granted to assessee.
Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed. In the result appeal filed by the assesse stands allowed.