DESIRE FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD -1, JAIPUR

cuke Desire Foundation ITO Exemption, Vs. 15, Sukh Vihar, Gurjar Ki Thadi, Ward-1, Mansarover, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAETD1460F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assesseeby : Shri R.S. Poonia(CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri Ajey Malik(CIT)( V.H.) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 27/02/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 29/02/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM

This appeal is filed by assessee, which is arising out of the order of thelearned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Jaipur dated 21.02.2023 [here in after referred as “CIT(E)”].

2.1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 199 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the “ with reference to above subject we request you that:-

1. 1. This present appeal is filed on 07.11.2023 against the ex-parte order passed by CIT(Exemption), Jaipur on rejection of approval u/s 80g of the I.T. Act, 1961 order dated 21.02.2023.

2. That this present appeal filed before Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench with a delay of 199 days.

3. Further, it is submitted that the reasonable cause of delay in filing the present appeal was due to time taken in process of legal advice whether the remedy is re- apply or filing of appeal, which is possible remedy action.

4. That while reapplying for the registration u/s. 80G of the I.T. Act, 1961 in Form No. 10AB there were some technical glitch on the Income Tax Portal and due to technical glitch time was taken in process of reapplying of Form No. 10AB.

5. That we were in constant touch with the office of CIT (Exemption). They assured us that the CBDT is likely to allow re-apply on portal for the application of registration u/s. 12A and approval u/s. 80G of the Act. But, the CBDT only allow to re-apply the application for registration u/s. 12A of the Act.

6. That the order passed by CIT (Exemption), Jaipur was ex-parte and the non compliance was due to mistake of earlier counsel. As assessee-trust was not aware about these non compliances of notices before CIT (Exemption), Jaipur In view of abovesubmission you are requested that kindly consider this as reasonable cause to condone the delay and kindly remand back the case to CIT(Exemption), Jaipur because the order was ex-parte order. So, that proper inquiry can be conducted and substantial justice may be delivered to the appellant.”

2.2 The ld. AR of the assessee appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee is serious on the duties and the delay of 199

3 Desire Foundation vs. ITO(E) days is on account of the technical glitches and the reasons are beyond his control and therefore, it has attributable to the delay. Considering the various judicial precedent where in the courts has considered ignored technicality of the reasons and has considered the delay. Even the apex court in the case of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji& Others 167 ITR 471(SC) directed the other courts to consider the liber approach in deciding the petition for condonation as the assessee is not going to achieve any benefit for the delay in fact the assessee is at risk.

2.3. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR objected to assessee’s application for condonation of delay and prayed that the bench may decide the issue as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

2.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee in support of the delay filed an affidavit praying for condonation of delay of 199 days and has also explained that the reasons were beyond his control and has resulted the delay. Considering the overall aspect of the matter we consider the reasons of delay of 199 days in filing the appeal by the assessee and same is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

“1. That the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jaipur by rejecting application u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is wrong, unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly direct to register the appellant. 2. That the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of the above grounds of appeal or to withdraw any of the them.”

It is also pertinent to mention that during the course of hearing in the appeal, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that he was deprived off availing adequate opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(E) in the application for registration/recognition as the application for 12AA has been given permission to re-apply on 29.09.2023 but the same is not for the 80G of the Act. Thus, we are of the considered view that the assessee permitted to re-apply for 12AA of the Act then in that case why not for 80G of the Act. Thus, the Bench does not want to go into merit of the case but it is imperative that the assessee must be provided adequate opportunity based on these facts. In view of the matter, the Bench feels that the assessee should be given one more chance to contest the case for recognition u/s. 80Gbefore the ld. CIT(E) and the ld. AR of the assessee is directed to produce all the relevant papers concerning the application so filed before the ld. CIT(E) to settle the dispute raised hereinabove.

7 Desire Foundation vs. ITO(E) 8. Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 29/02/2024.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh½ ¼ jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) U;kf;dlnL;@Judcial Member ys[kklnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 29/02/2024 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Desire Foundation, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO(E), Ward-1, Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 669/JPR/2023) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत