YUVAA URJAA FOUNDATION,NASHIK V. CIT(E), PUNE

ITA 698/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Yuvaa Urjaa Foundation, which appealed against the orders of the CIT (Exemption), Pune, rejecting their applications for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and approval under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted a delay in filing the appeals due to the assessee's consultant not informing them about the orders. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and previous judgments, condoned the delay and admitted the appeals for adjudication. The main issue was the rejection of the applications due to non-furnishing of required information by the assessee, which was attributed to their consultant's failure to act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714258 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others, Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT BOBDE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"बी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"B\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.698&700/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2024-2025 Yuvaa Urjaa Foundation, Shop No. 4, Anusaya Apartment, Shivaji Nagar, Satpur, Nashik-422012 Maharashtra PAN-AAATY7279H Vs CIT Exemption, Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde-CIT Date of hearing : 30.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 07.08.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(E) Pune dated 22.08.2024 framed u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) and under second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 135 days in filing of the present appeals. Application for condonation of delay has been filed. We have heard both the sides. The main reason for delay is that the impugned orders were sent on the e-mail Id of the assessee’s consultant who failed to take action Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.698&700/PUN/2025 nor informed the assessee about the passing of the impugned orders. Considering the reasonable cause and also taking a justice oriented approach placing relevance on the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) (Supreme Court) The Hon’ble Apex Court & in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382), we hereby condone the delay in filing of the instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. The issue for consideration is regarding rejection of application for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and application for approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act. 4. At the outset Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) fairly admitted that the assessee failed to avail the opportunity granted by Ld. CIT(E) for filing necessary details resulting into rejection of the applications filed u/s 12(A)(1)(ac)(iii) and 80G(5) of the Act and raised no objection if assessee is granted one more opportunity of appearing before Ld. CIT(E). 5. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the records placed before us. The application on Form 10AB each filed for registration u/s 12(1)(ac)(iii) and 80G(5) of the Act on 15.03.2024 and 18.03.2024 have been rejected by Ld. CIT(E) due to non furnishing of the information and details called by Ld. CIT(E). Considering the facts of the case and also considering that notices were sent to the consultants who did not inform the assessee, we in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties deem it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and without dwelling upon the merits of the case restore the issue of registration Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.698&700/PUN/2025 u/s 12(A)(1)(ac)(iii) and approval u/s 80G(5) of the act to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for necessary adjudication and to decide in accordance with law by way of passing a speaking order. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 698 & 700/PUN/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 07th day of August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दििांक / Dated: 07th August, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"बी\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"B\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ धिजी सधचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "