AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These appeals filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.09.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(Exemption),Chandigarh (for short “Competent Authority”) against the rejection of registration and consequent cancellation of approval u/s 12A(1)(ac) (vi) and 80G of the Act, for AY; 2026-27.
On hearing both sides we find that there was a delay of 194 days in filing of the appeals and assesse has filed an application for condonation of delay. Considering the reasons cited that due to assesse making an attempt to refile the applications afresh leading to delay, the delay is condoned and appeals are admitted for hearing.
Further, on hearing of the merits we find that primarily assesse failed before ld. prescribed authority in getting registration and approval u/s 12 & 80G respectively, due to inadvertence in mentioning the correct provision of law under which assesse had sought registration and consequential approval. We are of the considered view that the ends of justice require giving assesse an opportunity to contest on merits and mere technical glitch in mentioning wrong provision in online mode of applications should not prejudice the substantial rights.
Thus, we restore the issue on merits of the claim of the assesse to the files of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to let assesse revise its application mentioning correct provision of law under which the assesse intends to make application for seeking registration and corresponding approval. In aforesaid terms the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.