" 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 No.: 3281/CHNY/2025 M/s. Autism Residential Community (India), 94, 8th Street, Phase I, Sathuvachari, Vellore – 632 009. PAN: AAHTA 1553B Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri S. Vignesh, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22.01.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai dated 23.09.2025, rejecting Form No.10AB filed for seeking approval u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3281/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(E) has passed ex-parte order. 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 it took time for the assessee to comply to the notice since the assessee has to amend the Trust Deed to incorporate all the missing clauses. 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 order 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 order. It is the claim of the Ld.AR that the assessee requires time to include certain additional clauses in the Trust deed. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3281/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: opportunity to represent its cases and accordingly the issue is 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, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd 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 23rd 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 "