Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay of 243 days. The assessee had applied for registration under Section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was rejected by the CIT(E) for non-compliance with notices and lack of sufficient opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(E) subject to payment of costs, and accordingly, set aside the CIT(E)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to be heard by the CIT(E) regarding its registration application.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB, 147, 148, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M :
Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 15.04.2024.
There is a delay of 243 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the :- 2 -: reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.
The assessee has filed online application on 12.10.2023 in Form No.10AB u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). However, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application on the ground that the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued regarding its activities, despite having been afforded sufficient opportunity.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee before us has submitted that the assessee trust was unable to respond to the proceedings due to a lack of awareness of using income tax portal.
The Ld. AR therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate its claim.
ITA No.626/Chny/2025 :- 3 -:
The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the application as the assessee has not complied with the notices issued.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. It is noted that the Ld. CIT(E) had rejected the application filed by the assessee seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act on account of assessee’s failure to comply with the notices regarding its activities. However, before us, the Ld. AR has contended that adequate opportunity was not granted by the Ld. CIT(E) to produce the necessary details. In the interest of justice and considering principles of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(E) subject to payment of costs of Rs.2,000/-. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter to his file with a direction to examine the application afresh, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with law.
We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(E) on the :- 4 -: date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30th April, 2025.