AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These assessee’s twin appeals in IT A Nos. 8046 & 8047/Del/2025, arises against the CIT(Exemptions), Delhi’s DIN & order No . ITBA/EXM/F/EX M45/2024-25/1072523089(1) & 1072523163(1) dated 24.01.2025, in proceedings u/s 80G and 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly procee ded ex-parte.
Delay o f 246 days in filing of both the appeals are condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(E)’s de tailed discussion has proce eded ex-parte against the assessee thereby rejecting it’s section 80G and 12AB(1)(b)(ii) registration application.
Mr. Manoj Kumar vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(E)’s findings that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and there fore, it’s instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(E) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee , possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counse l could not be alto gether ruled out.
Faced w ith this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeals back to the CIT(E) for it’s afresh appro priate adjudication, within three effective opportunitie s subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accor dingly.
These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 8046 & 8047/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purpo se. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.