M/S. MADARSA ISLAMIA ARABIA KHADIMUL ULOOM V & PO BAGHONWALI,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. DCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Shorn of unnecessary details, it is observed that the AO while finalizing the assessment, noticed that the assessee was not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The assessee contended that its income was exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Not convinced, the AO denied the benefit of exemption and computed total income at Rs.45,28,101/-. In support of exemption of income, the assessee filed some additional evidence before the ld. CIT(A), who refused to admit such additional evidence and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Taking into consideration the entirety of facts and circumstances of the instant case, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not entertaining the additional evidence which was necessary for the purpose and which could not be filed before the AO. In our considered opinion, the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct him to de novo frame the assessment as per law after allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

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