PHILOSOPHICAL PRACTITIONERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA,DELHI V. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

ITA 3168/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Philosophical Practitioners Association of India appealing against the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), which rejected their applications for registration under sections 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal considered the appeals to be time-barred but accepted the assessee's explanation for the delay, citing the transition of their accounting staff and the abrupt discontinuation of their Chartered Accountant. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a re-hearing, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and the need for a complete examination of the assessee's submissions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784601 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYAINDER SINGH SIDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: SATYAJEET GOEL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3167/DEL/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) ITA No.3168/DEL/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Philosophical Practitioners Association of India, vs. CIT (Exemption), H.No.224, 1st Floor, New Delhi. Land Mark Near Choupal Village, Pitampura, Delhi – 110 034. (PAN : AAMCP8509L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Satyajeet Goel, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date of Order : 14.11.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(E)”, for short] dated 24.12.2024 for the AY 2023-24. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that both the appeals are time barred by 74 days. In response thereof, the Assessee has Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA Nos.3167 & 3168/Del/2025 filed an application, seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal on the ground that the assessee is a newly formed company with limited staff and the accounting and income tax matters were looked after by a semi-qualified accountant who has limited knowledge of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Further, he submitted that the Chartered Accountant who handled the proceedings before ld. CIT (E) abruptly discontinued the association with the assessee owning to which the assessee was left unassisted and took some time in searching for new tax professional for preparation and filing of the appeals. Further he submitted that an affidavit of the Director of the assessee is filed in support of the factual position. Accordingly, he prayed that the delay in filing the appeals may be condoned. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue submitted that there is an inordinate delay and objected to the condonation of delay. 4. We have heard both the counsels on the issue of condonation of delay. In our considered opinion, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice that the applicant filed an application on 29.06.2024 in Form 10AB for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act. He submitted that ld. CIT (E) Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA Nos.3167 & 3168/Del/2025 issued a questionnaire dated 05.07.2025 with a request to furnish certain details/documents/clarifications in support of its registration and in response, the assessee filed details/documents. However, ld. CIT (A) observed that the assessee has failed to submit complete details/information required in support of genuineness of the activities, charitable objects, commencement of the activities etc. Accordingly, ld. CIT (E) rejected the application filed in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii). Ld. AR further submitted that on the same basis, ld. CIT (E) also rejected application filed in Form 10AB for grant of approval u/s 80G(5). Ld. AR submitted that ld. CIT (E) has rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee which is against the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, he prayed that this issue may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(E) with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and relied on the order of Ld. CIT (E). 7. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observe that the ld. CIT (E) rejected the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act for not submitting the complete requisite details and documents in support of genuineness of the activities. In our considered Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA Nos.3167 & 3168/Del/2025 view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (E) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (E) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. Similarly, the registration u/s 80G was also rejected on the same ground. The assessee is in appeal before us by filing separate appeal vide ITA No.3167/Del/2025. We remit this issue also back to the file of ld. CIT (E) in the interest of justice. Both the issues under consideration may be decided as per law. 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 14th day of November, 2025. Sd/- sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 14.11.2025 TS Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA Nos.3167 & 3168/Del/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "