TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 32
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."] for A.Y. 2024-25 on the following revised grounds of appeal:- "1. GROUND NO.1: VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE: 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in passing the impugned order without granting the personal hearing through video conferencing as specifically and duly requested by the Appellant. 1.2. The Appellant prays that the impugned order; being in violation of the principles of natural justice and without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, be held as bad in law and quashed. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, 2. GROUND NO. 2: DENIAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT: 2.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r at the time of hearing of this appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are as under:- The assessee is a charitable institution which was originally registered u/s 12AA and was also enjoying approval u/s 80G of the Act. Consequent to the amended regime governing registration of charitable institutions, the assessee was required to obtain registration u/s 12AB of the Act. It is the case of the assessee that, while seeking re-registration, it inadvertently filed Form No. 10AB on 28/06/2024 instead of Form No.10A. The application was thus rejected by the Ld.CIT(E) vide order dated 23/12/2024. Aggrieved by the rejection, the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal. 3.1. The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 1227/Mu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in treating the appeal as infructuous. It was submitted that the proceedings relating to grant of registration u/s.12AB and the appeal arising from the intimation u/s.143(1) operate in distinct fields. According to the Ld.AR, pending the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(E) could at best have a bearing on the ultimate allowability of exemption u/s 11, but could not result in extinguishment of the statutory appeal arising from the intimation passed u/s.143(1). 4.1. The Ld.AR further submitted that a specific request for personal hearing through video conferencing was made before the Ld.CIT(A), which was declined. It was accordingly submitted that the impugned order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) be set aside. 4.2. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dly have a material bearing on assessee's claim of exemption u/s 11. However, the pendency of such proceedings could not, by itself, result in dismissal of the appeal arising out of the intimation. 5.3. The jurisdiction vested in the Ld.CIT(E) to consider grant of registration u/s 12AB and the jurisdiction exercised by the Ld.CIT(A) in an appeal arising out of an intimation u/s 143(1) are separate statutory jurisdictions. The Ld.CIT(A) was, therefore, required to adjudicate the appeal before him having regard to the legal and factual position relevant to the assessment year under consideration. This in any way cannot justify sustaining the adjustment made in the intimation under section 143(1), nor could it furnish a valid basis for ....