ITW INDIA SUPERANNUATION FUND,GURGAON vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

At the outset, learned AR submitted that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A), and the learned CIT(A) refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. Learned AR submitted that the assessee, ITW India Superannuation Fund pleaded to condone the delay on the ground that the assessee was pursuing alternative remedy of rectification under section 154 of the Act, seeking relief, but subsequently, on realizing the proper procedure, they filed the appeal before the learned CIT(A), which was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) in limine. It is the submission of the learned AR that in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund, for the same assessment year 2015-16, under identical circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 378/Hyd/2021 by order dated 23/12/2021 condoned the delay of 1090 days and remanded the issue to the file of learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer holding that the claim for deduction under section 10(25) of the Act cannot be denied basing on the procedural lapses. Since the facts are identical, learned AR prayed to follow the view taken in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra).

Though the learned DR vehemently argued in justification of the impugned order, the fact remains that in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal condoned the delay on the ground of prosecution of the remedy, but before a wrong forum and restored the issue to the file of the learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

In these circumstances, while respectfully following the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra), we condone the delay in this case also, duly directing the learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment, after

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.