LIHAZ FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE
PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :
The assessee has filed these appeals challenging the orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Mumbai
[Ld.CIT(E)], seeking permanent registration u/s. 12AA and Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟).
The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had been granted provisional registration under sec. 12AA and 80G of the Act and thereafter the assessee filed applications before Ld CIT(E) seeking permanent registration under sec. 12AA and 80G of the Act. However, due to miscommunication, the assessee could not furnish the details that were called for by the Ld.CIT(E) for granting the permanent assessee.The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee is otherwise in possession of all the details that were called for by the Ld.CIT(E). Accordingly, the Ld.AR prayed that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present all the details that were called for by the Ld.CIT(E).
We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we are of the view that in interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present the details that were called for/may be called for by the Ld.CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside both the orders passed by the Ld.CIT(E) and restore the issues urged in both the appeals to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for examining both the applications afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11-02-2025 [ANIKESH BANERJEE]
[B.R. BASKARAN]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai,
Dated: 11-02-2025
TNMM
Copy to :
1)
The Appellant
2)
The Respondent
3)
The CIT concerned
4)
The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai
5)
Guard file
By Order
Dy./Asst.