HINDU JAGRUTI NYAS,THANE vs. CIT-EXEMPTION PUNE, PUNE

The facts and issues under both the appeals are similar and interrelated. Hence, both these appeals are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of brevity and convenience 3. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 27.09.2024 passed by learned CIT(E) wherein the assessee’s application u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) r/w section 12AB of the Act for grant of registration has been rejected. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “i) The CIT Exemption has erred in rejecting the Application for the Approval of Registration u/s 12AB. ii) The CIT Exemption has erred in cancelling provisional approval of Registration u/s 12AB of the act granted by order dated 31/12/2021. iii) The CIT Exemption has erred in rejecting the Application without giving opportunity of hearing iv) The CIT Exemption has erred in not granting regular approval u/s 12AB v) The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, and modify aforesaid ground/s of appeal at or any time before the hearing as he may be advised from time to time.”

Briefly stated, the assessee moved an application on 31.03.2024 before learned CIT(E)in Form 10AB seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. Ld. CIT(E) rejected it on the ground that the assessee had failed to file supporting evidence in respect of its charitable activities. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(Exemption), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.

At the very outset, Ld. AR has submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for the grant of registration without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, he has requested to restore the matter back to the Ld. CIT(E) and to afford an opportunity of furnishing the required details before him for deciding the matter. Ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that the appellant was afforded various opportunities and therefore he has supported the impugned order. 7. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the assessee filed certain documents and information in response to notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E). However, Ld. CIT(E) passed the order rejecting the application on 27.09.2024, keeping in view the statutory limitation period which was expiring on 30.09.2024. We accordingly deem it just and proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for deciding the matter afresh on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee to furnish requisite details. Needless to add, the assessee should also make necessary compliance before Ld. CIT(E). The impugned order dated 27.09.2024 is set aside with directions to Ld. CIT(E) to decide the matter afresh within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.