CENTRE FOR SOCIAL SERVICE AND RESEARCH,DINDIGUL V. CIT (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI

ITA 3304/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the Centre for Social Service and Research against the orders of the CIT (Exemption), Chennai, which rejected their applications for registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals were initially delayed due to the health condition of the Managing Trustee, which was accepted as a valid reason for the delay. The Tribunal noted that the CIT (Exemption) had passed ex-parte orders due to non-response from the assessee to notices. The Tribunal decided to provide another opportunity to the assessee to present their case, emphasizing justice and equity.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472611 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A.G.SATHYANARAYANA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 207

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,‘सी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी जगदȣश, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3304 & 3305/CHNY/2024 Centre for Social Service and Research, Hanumantharayankottai, Dindigul-624 054. PAN: AACAC-6395-H Vs. CIT (Exemption), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri A.G.Sathyanarayana, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 12.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These two appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against two separate orders of CIT(E) both dated 21.08.2024, 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’). 2. There is a delay of 207 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of these appeals. The reasons stated - 2 - ITA No.3304 & 3305/CHNY/2024 in the condonation application for belated filing of these appeals is that Managing Trustee of the assessee trust was not well and confined to bed at the time of receiving impugned order and a medical certificate to that effect is filed on record. Thus, the Managing Trustee was not aware of the impugned order passed by CIT(E), hence there was delay in filing these appeals. 3. On perusal of the aforesaid reasons in the condonation application, we are of the view that there is sufficient cause for belated filing of these appeals and no latches can be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay in filing these appeals and proceed to dispose off the appeals on merits. 4. 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 / show cause notices issued from the office of the CIT(E). The ld.AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to assessee trust to represent its cases before the CIT(E). 5. The ld.DR supported the orders of CIT(E). 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(E) had issued notices / show cause notices by e-mail directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee - 3 - ITA No.3304 & 3305/CHNY/2024 to the notices issued, the CIT(E) passed ex-parte orders. It is the claim of the assessee that the notices issued through e-mail have been missed inadvertently since it was received in spam folder. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to various 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 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. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (जगदȣश) (JAGADISH) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चेÛनई/Chennai, Ǒदनांक/Date:12.03.2025 DS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Madurai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. "