MHB Trust vs CIT(Exemption)

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.338 & 337/Del/2026 for assessment year 2025-26 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi’s orders, both dated 22.09.2025 having DINs and orders no. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1081013121(1) and ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2025-26/1081013242(1) involving proceedings u/s 12AB and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 45 days each in filing both the instant appeals is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings; and; therefore, the matters may be restored back to the CIT(E). The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant both appeals back to the CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.338 & 337/Del/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.