Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed 38 days late, but the delay was condoned. The assessee sought restoration of the issue to the CIT(E) for reconsideration, citing insufficient time to respond to a notice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was given only 3 days to respond to the CIT(E)'s notice. Therefore, to ensure natural justice, the issues were restored to the CIT(E) for readjudication, with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard and rectify defects.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is barred by limitation, and if the issues related to registration under sections 12A and 80G should be restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
12A, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2024-2025) Rajasthan Parishad, Vs CIT(Exemption), Bhubaneswar Amar Bhawan, Madhusudan Marg, Bisra Road Rourkela, Odisha-769001 PAN No. :AAATR 2879 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bajoria, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(E), Hyderabad, dated 13.12.2024 passed in DIN & Notice No.ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1071209827(1) for A.Y.2024-2025.
The appeal of the assessee is barred by 38 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating therein sufficient reasons for delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 38 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee has registration u/s.12A of the Act w.e.f.16.10.1984 vide an order dated 16.10.1984. It was the submission that the assessee had e-filed an application for registration u/s.80G of the Act. The ld. CIT(E) has decided the issue against the assessee on two grounds, one being that there is no compliance on the part of the assessee and the second that the assessee has selected the wrong section code in Form 10A. It was the submission that the issue may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E), so as to grant the assessee adequate opportunity to represent his case and also for rectification of defect, if any.
In reply, ld. CIT-DR did not raise any serious objection.
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee had been granted only 03 days time to respond to the notice issued by the ld. CIT(E), in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and we do so. The ld. CIT(E) shall also grant the assessee adequate opportunity to rectify any defects in the application and make necessary arrangements for opening of the portal for making the necessary amendments.