MIG CRICKET CLUB,MUMBAI vs. ITO(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted one more opportunity to present its case, in the interest of natural justice.
What were the facts?
The assessee, MIG Cricket Club, had its exemption under Section 11 rejected by the Assessing Officer. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) due to communication issues with its employee and a spelling mistake in its email address.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and if a fresh opportunity should be granted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “D” Bench, Mumbai.
Before: Justice C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 5.6.2023 passed by the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2015-16.
The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer, whereby he has determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2.43 crores rejecting the claim for exemption under section 11 of the Act.
The Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee has been granted registration under section 12A of the Act and accordingly, it claimed exemption under section 11 of the Act in the return of income. However, the exemption so claimed was rejected by the Assessing Officer and hence the assessee filed appeal before the Ld CIT(A).
2 MIG Cricket Club
However, the assessee could not appear before the learned CIT(A) for the reasons beyond its control and hence the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte confirming the assessment order. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for non-appearance before Ld CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee had given email id of its employee to the Income tax department and the said employee has left the organization. He also did not inform about the notices issued by Ld CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee has also given an alternative email id to the department, but there was a spelling mistake in it. In view of the above, the assessee was not aware of the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and hence it could not represent before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly learned AR submitted that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case before the learned CIT(A).
We heard learned DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by learned AR, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced on 4.12.2023.
More judgments on Section 11
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 531/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 530/NAG/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026