"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘ए’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 685/CHNY/2025 SMH Medical & Educational Trust, No.106, Kamatchi Nagar, Budha Koil, Arapanacheri, Kanchipuram – 631 502. PAN: ABFTS 8740K Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri J. Saravanan, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai dated 09.12.2024, rejecting the assessee’s application seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). 2. There is a delay of 5 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay. On perusal of the same, - 2 - ITA No.685/CHNY/2025 we find there is sufficient reason for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice the CIT(E) had rejected assessee’s application in Form 10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Act for the reason that there was no compliance to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(E) dated 12.09.2024, 04.10.2024 and 14.11.2024. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee’s trust had not noticed the notices issued from the office of the CIT(E) on account of not looking into the e- filing portal of the Income-tax Department at the relevant time. Consequently, it could not upload the details called for from the office of the CIT(E). In the interest of justice and equity, it was prayed that assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to furnish the necessary documents in support of its case for registration u/s.12AB of the Act. 4. The Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(E). 5. We have heard rival submission and perused the material on record. The assessee had not responded to the hearing notices issued from the office of the CIT(E). Consequently, the assessee’s - 3 - ITA No.685/CHNY/2025 application for registration u/s.12AB of the Act was rejected by the CIT(E). In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity. 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. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चेÛनई/Chennai, Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 3rd June, 2025 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. "