RANAVAV MADRESA CHARITY TALIMI TRUST,PORBANDAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2 , RAJKOT

Appeal was immediately filed on gaining of knowledge of passing online order on receipt of call from department for payment of demand.

That there was no ill motive behind not filling appeal in time.”

During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that the assessee was unaware about the online proceedings. That the Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee to explain the case.

On the contrary, the Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue has not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR.

We have heard both the parties. We note that the assessee has unaware about the proceedings. In the absence of any contrary material of fact available on record, there is a sufficient cause for delay in filing the present appeal u/s. 253(5) of the Act, empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after explain by the assessee. After considering the reason explained by the Ld.

Brief facts of the case that the applicant has filed an application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the IT Act in Form no 10AB electronically and as per data available, the same is filed in ITBA portal on 20/12/2023. This application was found to be prima-facie, non-maintainable and accordingly vide letter dated 27/03/2024 certain clarifications were sought from the applicant. In response to the same, the applicant has not submitted reply. On perusal of the details available on record, it is noticed that the applicant has been granted provisional registration under Sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A vide order on 27-05- 2021 for the period from A.Y.2021-22 to A.Y. 2023-24. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file the application u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in lieu of 12A(1)(ac)(ii).

That the assessee has filed an appeal to challenge the validity of order of the Ld. CIT(E) before us on 07.06.2024.

During the course of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that the documents not submitted by the assessee because the assessee was not aware of online proceedings going on before the Ld. CIT(E). That the Ld. AR prayed that one more opportunity kindly given to the assessee for explained the case before the Ld. CIT(E).

On the Contrary, the Ld. DR for the revenue relied on the judgment of Ld. CIT(E), and the Ld. DR further not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR of the assessee.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the several notices have been issued by the Ld. CIT(E) to submit the documents related to the case. Since, the appellant did not submitted the relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(E). We note that the assessee has not made the compliance with the notices for hearing issued by the Ld. CIT(E). We note that the assessee has not gave due care and attention to the case and negligent in pursuing the case before the assessment, and the assessee has also a non-cooperative attitude in pursuing the case. We direct the assessee to deposit a cost of Rs. 5,000/-, and the same is to be deposited with Prime Minster Relief fund (Government of India), the receipt is to be submitted with the Registrar of this Tribunal. Keeping in view, and in the interest of justice, an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(E). We set aside the order of Ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication on merit after giving due opportunity to the assessee of being heard.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical purposes.