PERILOVANPATTI HINDU NADARS(MADRAS) URAVINMURAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD 3 CHENNAI, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal directed the assessee to file fresh condonation petitions with affidavits before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was instructed to consider these petitions and pass orders in accordance with the law.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a charitable society, filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays for multiple assessment years. The assessee failed to submit a formal condonation petition with supporting evidence for these delays.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the dismissal of appeals in limine by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to properly seek condonation of delay. The Tribunal considered whether to allow the appeals to be heard on merits after proper condonation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.
O R D E R
PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate but identical order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 11.07.2023 for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 and dated 13.07.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable society duly registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and filed its return of income on 03.02.2014 for the assessment year 2013-14 declaring total income of ₹.44,49,572/- and the income returned has been admitted as NIL. The assessee seems to have offered ₹.36,35,550/- as income from business and an amount of ₹.8,14,022/- as income from other sources. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 23.09.2014. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 24.07.2015. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act dated 29.02.2016 assessing total taxable income at ₹.44,78,452/- by treating the assessee as AOP for the assessment year 2013-14.
Similarly, the Assessing Officer assessed the total taxable income of the assessee at ₹.36,87,013/- for the assessment year 2014-15 and ₹.71,99,861/- for the assessment year 2017-18 by treating the assessee as AOP.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 431 days, 145 days and 39 days in filing the appeal for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2017-18 respectively. However, while filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) in Form No. 35, the assessee did not submit formal condonation petition seeking condonation of delay along with affidavit and documentary evidence in support of reasons stated at Column No. 15 of Form No. 35. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed in limine all the appeals filed by the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. When these appeals were taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Hence, we proceed to decide the appeals on merits after hearing the ld. DR.
We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. Against the addition/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 431 days, 145 days and 39 days in filing the appeal for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2017-18 respectively. However, while filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) in Form No. 35, the assessee did not submit formal condonation petition seeking condonation of delay along with affidavit and documentary evidence in support of reasons stated at Column No. 15 of Form No. 35. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed in limine all the appeals filed by the assessee. Under the above facts and circumstances, we direct the assessee to file fresh condonation petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) shall consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17th October, 2023 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026