ACIC BMU FOUNDATION,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2882/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 January 2026AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the circumstances. It was held that the assessee deserves an opportunity to contest the matter on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12A was dismissed by the CIT(Exemption) for non-appearance. Consequently, the appeal filed before the Tribunal was delayed by 314 days. The delay was attributed to the authorized representative's preoccupation with other matters.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. PoojaSwaroop, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 22.01.2026Pronounced: 30.01.2026

Date of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 30.01.2026 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 23.04.2024of the CIT (Exemption), Delhi(hereinafter referred as Ld. First

P a g e | ACIC BMU Foundation (AY: 2023-24) Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN &Notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1064297824(1) rejecting application u/s 12A (1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel has submitted that the assessee failed to appear before competent authority and for that reason the application of assessee seeking registration was dismissed. It was submitted for that reason there was also delay in filing the appeal here. We find that there is delay of 314 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal, and application is supported by the affidavit of Pankaj Agarwal authorized representative dealing with the tax matters who has deposed that due to heavy pressure of time baring matters his attention escaped filing appeal for assessee. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as it appears that there was failure on the part of the representatives of the professional of the assessee in appearing before Ld. Competent Authority and also filing the appeal here, we condoned the delay and admit the appeal.

3.

We are of considered view that assesse deserves opportunity to contest on merits by filing the submissions and evidences. Thus, the appeal of the P a g e | ACIC BMU Foundation (AY: 2023-24) assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, and the issues on merits are restored to the files of the Ld. CIT(E) to issue a fresh notice to the assessee and decide the application of the assessee in Form 10AB afresh.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.01.2026

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

All 1,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →