AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:
The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.09.2025, passed under section 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(E)”].
None appeared for appellant/assessee.
With assistance of Ld. DR perused the record. We observed that in ground No. 3 And 4 it is stated that the Ld. CIT(E) erred in not granting personal hearing whether through Video Conferencing or otherwise violating the principle of natural justice. Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application for registration by ignoring the evidence on record with the application for registration and past records.
From examination of record, it is crystal clear that principles of natural justice have not been followed by the appellant authority. In view of above facts, it is considered expedient to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(E) and restored the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for a fresh decision in accordance with law, after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 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.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.