SHRI DURGA MANDIR TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) had proceeded ex-parte, possibly due to communication gaps. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee three effective opportunities.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2023-24 arose from an order of the CIT(Exemption) dated 26.09.2023, passed under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The proceedings were conducted ex-parte against the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in proceeding ex-parte against the assessee without proper opportunity, and if the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman
Asstt. Year : 2023-24 Shri Durga Mandir Trust, Vs CIT(Exemption), WZ 139/14, Nangal Raya, West New Delhi-110002 Delhi, Delhi-110046 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AANTS2676R Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2023-24, arises against the CIT(Exemption), Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1056547954(1) dated 26.09.2023, in proceedings u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(E)’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex- parte against the assessee thereby declining it’s claim of
Mr. Mahesh Kumar vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of the CIT(E)’s findings that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, it’s instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(E) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the learned CIT(E) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at it’s own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
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 →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026