BADALPUR CHARITY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellant prays your honour to grant an opportunity of being heard in the interest of natural justice.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellant prays honour to set aside the case to the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for fresh adjudication.

The appellant submits that at the time of appellate proceedings, it could not place submissions, explanation & justification before the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and an ex-parte order has been passed by the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Having gone through the fact, no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the matter is set aside to the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. The appellant shall make due compliance with the notices issued by the authorities & furnish all the requisite details & explanation.

The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the aforesaid ground or grounds if necessary.

Firstly we are taking up ITA No. 2511/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2012- 13 as both the appeals are identical and the assessee argued this matter. The assessee has filed its return of income for the relevant Assessment Year. The assessee is a trust and non-filer of return of income. The Assessing Officer observed that it has resulted in escapement of income. Hence the case of the assessee-trust was re-opened after recording the reasons and after taking approval from the prescribed authority. Notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2017 was issued and duly served upon the assesse-trust. In response to notice u/s.148 of the Act, the assesse-

Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assesse filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee’s appeal is delayed by 589 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining that due to the negligence of the consultant, an ex parte order was passed by the CIT(A). The explanation furnished by the assessee, supported by the additional evidence, appears to be genuine. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

As regards to the issues involved, it appears that the CIT (A) has totally ignored the fact that the assessee has not complied with the direction. The Ld. AR further submitted that since the CIT (A) has not decided the case on merit, the matter may be remanded back to the file of CIT(A).

The Ld. DR relied on the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A).

We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assesses on merit, but dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. In fact, the CIT(A) has issued four notices as mentioned in para 5 of the order, but has not mentioned whether the same was served to the assessee or not. Since, the matter is not decided by giving adequate opportunity, the Ld. AR contended that the matter may be remanded back. This plea of the Ld. AR appears to be genuine. It is particularly mentioned that the CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merit, therefore, we remand the matter to the file of the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) will adjudicate the issues contesting therein on merits. Needless to say, assesse be given an opportunity of hearing by following the Principle of Natural Justice. Hence, the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

The facts involved in this appeal are identical to those in ITA No. 2511/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2012-13, which has been decided partly in favour of the assessee for statistical purposes in the preceding paragraphs. Therefore, the decision rendered in ITA No. 2511/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2012-13 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present appeal in ITA No. 2510/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2011-12. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीयŮितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, मुंबई 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard file.