9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. There is a delay of 13 days in filing of both the appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee has moved separate condonation applications for condonation of delay. Sworn affidavits have been filed along with the applications stating therein the reasons for the said delay. After hearing both the sides and considering the contents of the condonation applications filed along with the affidavits, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. In ITA No.132/PUN/2025, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(Exemption) in rejecting the application for registrat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heard vide the said notice. The assessee was specifically informed that in the event of failure to comply by the due date, the application shall be liable to be rejected and the registration shall also be liable to be cancelled. The compliance to the said notice was due on 16/10/2024. The notice was duly served on the assessee through e-portal and email. However, the assessee neither submitted explanation to the show cause notice till date nor availed the opportunity of being heard. 6. Since, the assessee has not furnished any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, it is presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. 7. Considering the above facts discussed in the show notice and discrepancies noticed and al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raise any additional ground based on the merits of the case & within the corners of the law at the time of hearing. 6. Admittedly, the facts of the case in ITA No.133/PUN/2025 are similar to that of ITA No.132/PUN/2025 narrated above. It is the submission of the Ld. AR that since the Ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier, he refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act. 7. Similar grounds have been raised in ITA No.133/PUN/2025 which read as under: 1. The O/o the learned Respondent has cancelled the application under Clause (iii) of 1st Proviso to Section 80G of the Act on the basis of erroneous order dated 24.10.2024 cancelling the regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(E). 9. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 10. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the order of the CIT(E) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the assessee did not respond to the second notice issued by the CIT(Exemption) in which he has asked for certain details on account of certain discrepancies found from the submissions made by the assessee earlier for which he rejected the application filed by the assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
