UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA,KOLKATA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE 1(1), EXEMPT, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the University of Calcutta is exempt from the requirement of auditing its books of accounts under Section 44AB as its income is exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiab). Consequently, no penalty can be levied under Section 271B.
What were the facts?
The University of Calcutta, wholly funded by the state government and operating solely for educational purposes, failed to get its books of accounts audited under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite its gross receipts exceeding ₹1.00 crore. The Assessing Officer levied a penalty under Section 271B for this non-compliance.
What were the issues?
Whether a state-funded university operating solely for educational purposes is liable for penalty under Section 271B for failing to audit its accounts, given its income is exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiab).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
These are the appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] even dated04.12.2025 for the AY 2018-19 & A.Y. 2019-20. The penalties were levied u/s 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) vide order dated 27.09.2023 & 08.08.2024 by the ld. AO.
The only issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the penalty of ₹1,50,000/- as levied by the ld. AO for not getting the books of accounts audited.
ITA Nos. 692 & 693/KOL/2026 University of
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 44AB
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Income Tax Officer, WD-3(3), Pmt Building vs Oring Industrial Networki Ng Private…ITA 181/PUN/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- ITO, Lower Parel vs Shreeji Paper Corporation, Dn NagarITA 2966/MUM/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Devayatbhai Kalotara, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, RajkotITA 679/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026