HIJALDIHA VIVEKANANDA SEVA SAMITY,BANKURA vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA

The assessee in is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(E) for rejection of the assessee’s application for grant of provisional registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), whereas, in ITA 280/Kol/2024, the assessee has assailed the order of the CIT(E) for rejection of the application of the assessee for grant of provisional approval under clause (iii) of 1st Proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the impugned orders of the CIT(E) to submit that the same I.T.A. No.279&280/Kol/2024 Hijaldiha Vivekananda Seva Samity are ex parte order. That the applications of the assessee in both the appeals have been dismissed for want of prosecution. The ld. counsel for the assessee in this respect has submitted that the requisite documents and details have already been furnished by the assessee- trust along with application, however the ld. CIT(E) has failed to examine the same. It has been further submitted that due to certain unavoidable circumstances, the assessee-trust could not mark its presence before the ld. CIT(E) on the date fixed for hearing. The ld. counsel has submitted that the assessee-trust may be given an opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(E).

The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee.

In our view, the interests of justice will be well-served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the impugned orders of the CIT(E) in both the appeals are set aside and the matters are restored to the file of the CIT(E) for decision afresh. Needless to say that the CIT(E) will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. (प�रणाम�व�प, �नधा�रती क� दोन� अपील� को सांि�यक�य उ�दे�य� के �लए �वीकाय� माना जाता है।)