PARAM NIKETAN FOUNDATION,MULUND WEST vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, CUMBALLA HILL

आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M): 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned CIT(Exemptions), Mumbai u/s. 12AB/(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act 1961, wherein learned CIT(Exemptions) has rejected the application of appellant/provisionally registered trust for grant of regular registration.

2 ITA no. 1518/MUM/2024 Param Niketan Foundation 2. None responded for the appellant. Heard learned DR and perused the material available on record. 3. It appears from the perusal of records that delay condonation application along with affidavit filed on behalf of Mr. Mahesh R. Kapoor, who is one of the trustees of the appellant trust, is on record with a prayer to condone the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal. The appeal has been preferred on 29.03.2024 against the impugned order dated 05.12.2023. It is stated therein that the appellant was not provided any opportunity to rectify the mistake, as the two said notices were issued through E–Portal only. In view of the interest of justice, unrebutted contents in appellant’s affidavit and in the said delay is condoned. 4. A combined reading of the statement of facts and impugned order shows that the appellant is a society established on 01.04.1996 to carry out education and medical relief activities for the poor and advancement of objects of general public utility and was granted provisional registration u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the IT Act on 06.04.2022 for the period from A.Y. 2022–23 to A.Y. 2024–25. The application of the appellant trust has been rejected by learned CIT(Exemptions) vide impugned order dated 05.12.2023 on the ground that the same was moved u/s. 12(1)(ac)(iv), whereas the right section was 12A(1)(ac)(iii). The appellant trust applied again for regularization of the provisional trust. The application of the appellant trust was again dismissed by the learned CIT(Exemptions) vide order dated 13.03.2023 for want of necessary compliance.

3 ITA no. 1518/MUM/2024 Param Niketan Foundation 5. It is well established principle of law that quoting a wrong provision of law does not create a bar or stand in the way of court or any quasi judicial authority, considering the application if such authority has jurisdiction to decide the same. Even for seeking any further information, the authority deciding the cause, is required to grant sufficient opportunity to the recipient of justice. Technical justice cannot replace the substantial justice. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to direct learned CIT(Exemptions) to decide the application afresh with reasoned decision. Needless to say that learned CIT(Exemptions) shall ensure substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice by affording the appellant an opportunity to make correction of relevant section in the application and to supply required information if any. 6. In the result the appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 05.12.2023 is set aside. The case is restored to the file of the learned CIT(Exemptions) for disposal in accordance with law. Order pronounced on 04.07.2024.