Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) rejected both applications for not being maintainable after the assessee failed to respond to a notice requesting documents.
Held
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to prosecute the applications. The appeals were set aside to the file of the CIT(E) for a fresh hearing, provided the assessee substantiates its case.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(E) for registration and approval applications, despite initial non-compliance.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 80G(5)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member): These appeals preferred by the appellant / assessee are against the impugned orders of even date 18.11.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Chennai in Application No.CIT (Exemption), Chennai /2024-25 /12AA /12428 vide DIN & Notice No.ITBA /EXM/F /EXM45/2024-25/1070433904(1) and Application No.CIT (Exemption), Chennai /2024-25 /12AA /12456 vide DIN & Notice No.ITBA /EXM/F /EXM45/2024-25/1070433951(1).
& 78 /Chny/2025 :- 2 -:
Brief facts are as under:
The assessee / applicant filed an application in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and also filed an application in Form No.10AB seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ in short) on 17.05.2024. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(E) vide notice dated 11.11.2024 requested the assessee to furnish the relevant documents / details and its clarifications either by uploading online in the e-filing portal, on or before 14.11.2024. However, no response from the applicant to notice dated 11.11.2024. Hence, having no choice, the ld.CIT(E) rejected the both applications referred supra as not maintainable. Assessee is in further appeal before us.
At the outset, Ld.AR for the appellant submitted that the trustee is not familiar with the online mails and digital operation etc. The Ld.AR for the appellant prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given before ld.CIT(E), assessee will file requisite details called for and prosecute the both applications properly. Ld.CIT-DR relied upon the order of ld.CIT(E) and prayed for dismissal of appeal.
We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and submissions addressed by the parties before us. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice assessee should be given one more opportunity before ld.CIT(E) to prosecute the both applications as referred supra filed in Form 10AB. The ld.AR for the assessee also assured the bench that the assessee will file all necessary requisites/details asked by the ld.CIT(E). Therefore, in the & 78 /Chny/2025 :- 3 -: light of above assurance/undertaking we set aside these appeals to the file of ld.CIT(E) to hear the both applications afresh after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(E) shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of the application as per law. The ld. counsel, who appeared through virtual mode also assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute his case diligently.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th March 2025 at Chennai.