9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ject, the Id. CIT(Exemption) has erred in rejecting the application for registration u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when assessee was prevented from reasonable cause for not complying with notices issued by CIT(E). 2. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. The fact of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application for registration/incorporation in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act on 27.10.2023. The assessee-trust had been granted order of provisional approval in Form No.10AC on 16.02.2022 under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act for the period commencing from AY.2022-23. In respect of the application filed by the assessee-trust in Form No.10AB, the assessee-trust was asked by CIT(E) to file details and documents vide notice dated 15.12.2023 and 09.03.2024 respectively. In response to the said notices, the assessee neither filed any response nor sought any adjournment. In absence of the requisite details, the CIT(E) decided the case based on materials available on record. At para 6.1, the CIT(E) has mentioned that self-certified c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used the materials available on record. The CIT(E) issued two notices on 15.12.2023 and 09.03.2024 but there was no compliance from the assessee. The CIT(E) has observed that the assessee failed to file documentary evidence to enable him to satisfy about the genuineness of the activities of the trust and whether the activities are in consonance with the objects of the trust. The ld. AR has contended before us that the assessee is ready to submit all details and evidences needed by the CIT(E) and one more opportunity may be given to the assessee. We find that assessee could not pursue his case before the CIT(E) by filing necessary evidences and documents. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to file relevant documents/evidences and to plead his case before the CIT(E). It is settled law that principles of natural justice requires that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and to pass a speaking order after hearing the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the other hand, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax - Departmental Representative (ld. CIT-DR) for the revenue submitted assessee has failed to explain 'sufficient cause' for the delay; hence, delay should not be condoned. 10. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and find that there is a delay of 27 days. We find that assessee was neither negligent nor deliberate in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The CBDT Circular No.7/2024 had extended the time for approval up to 30.06.2024. The reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delay would constitute "sufficient cause" for delay in filing this appeal. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 11. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.735/SRT/2024 are as follows: "1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law, the Id. CIT(Exemption) has erred in rejecting assessee's application u/s 80G(5) filed on 27.10.2023 on the ground that assessee didn't file the application before 30.09.2022 when the assessee has filed the application in time as per the extension granted till 30.09.2023 as per circular no.6/2023 dated 20.05.2023. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsequent to the Circular No.8/2022, Circular No.6/2023, dated 24.06.2023 was issued extending the date till 30.09.2023. But, there was confusion that the extension does not apply to application for approval u/s 80G of the Act. However, after the order passed by CIT(E), a fresh Circular No.7/2024 was issued on 25.04.2024, extending the date till 30.06.2024. The ld. AR submitted that para 4.1 of the said Circular (supra) is applicable in case of the assessee-trust which extends time for making fresh application up to 30.06.2024. She submitted that assessee-trust has already made application u/s 80G(5) and the CIT(E) has rejected such application before issuance of the above Circular No.7/2024 (supra) solely on the ground that application was furnished after the permissible time. The fresh application was required to be filed on or before 30.06.2024. The assessee did not file the fresh application as the matter was pending before the Tribunal. The ld. AR submitted that the application filed earlier should be treated as fresh application filed before 30.06.2024 as per the intent and spirit of the Circular No.7/2024 (supra). She relied on the decision of ITAT, Chandigarh in case of FI F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
