Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals were filed three days late. The assessee applied for condonation of delay, providing reasonable grounds. The Revenue did not object to the delay. The CIT(E) had rejected the assessee's application for registration under sections 12A and 80G.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of three days for both appeals. It was held that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard and to produce documents before the CIT(E). Therefore, the appeals were restored to the file of the CIT(E) for readjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(E) rightly rejected the assessee's application without providing adequate opportunity and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned.
Sections Cited
12A(1)(ac)(iii), 12AB(1), 10AC, 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri D.V.Pathi, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Md. A.H.Chowdhary, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 16/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/ : 16/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(Exemption), Patna, both dated 25.09.2025 passed for the assessment year 2024-2025.
At the outset, it is found that both the appeals of the assessee are filed by 03 days each. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating sufficient reasons for delay in filing both the appeals before the Tribunal, which are found reasonable. Ld. CIT-DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 03 days each in filing both the appeals before the Tribunal is condoned and both appeals of the assessee are admitted for hearing.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(E) has rejected/cancelled the application filed by the assessee trust for registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) read with Section 12AB(1) of the Act along with provisional registration granted u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi) in form 10AC for A.Y.2023-2024 to 2025-206 and approval u/s.80G of the Act without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the submission that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(E) to decide the issue afresh enabling the assessee to file the relevant documents to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(E).
In reply, ld CIT-DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by the ld. CIT(E). It was submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(E) deserve to be upheld.
We have considered the rival submissions. On perusal of the impugned orders in both the appeals of the assessee, it is found that the assessee-trust has already shown its inability to produce the documents as required by the ld. CIT(E), however, during the course of hearing, ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity be provided to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(E). In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the issues in both the appeals appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for readjudication the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.