AIC RAISE BUSINESS INCUBATOR,COIMBATORE V. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI

ITA 3206/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. AIC Raise Business Incubator, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai, rejecting their Form No.10AB for seeking registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals were initially decided ex-parte due to non-response from the assessee to the notices issued by the CIT(E). The assessee argued that the Managing Trustee was unavailable to respond due to travel commitments. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to provide another opportunity to the assessee to present their case, emphasizing the principles of justice and equity.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 831798 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A. SASIKKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A.G. SATYANARAYANA

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘ए’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं सुĮी पɮमावती एस, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND MS PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 3205 & 3206/CHNY/2025 M/s. AIC Raise Business Incubator, SF No.653/1A3B, Kuruchi Village, Coimbatore – 641 021. PAN: AARCA 7774R Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri A.G. Satyanarayana, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri A. Sasikkumar, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai both dated 29.09.2025, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’). Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.3205 & 3206/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(E) has passed ex-parte orders. The reason for deciding the appeals ex-parte was that the assessee did not reply to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(E). The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has responded to the first notice issued on 20.05.2025 but was unable to respond to the notice issued on 06.09.2025 within the stipulated time, since the Managing Trustee of the assessee trust was on travel and was unavailable during the issue of show- cause notice. Therefore, it was submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to represent its cases before the CIT(E). 3. The ld.DR supported the orders of CIT(E). 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(E) had issued notices directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(E) passed ex-parte orders. It is the claim of the Ld.AR that the Managing Trustee of the assessee trust was on travel and was unavailable during the issue of show-cause notice and hence, could not respond. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.3205 & 3206/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: of the assessee in not responding to the notice issued from the office of the CIT(E). However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to represent its cases and accordingly the issues are restored to the files of the CIT(E). The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd January, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (पɮमावती एस) (PADMAVATHY S) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 22nd January, 2026 RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "