SHRI BAWALIYA BABA GAUSHALA SEWA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-1, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 374/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 August 2026AY 2019-206 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A), considering the COVID-19 pandemic and the assessee's charitable nature. The orders of the CIT(A) were set aside and the appeals were remanded back for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable society, filed returns for AY 2019-20 and 2020-21. The CPC processed these returns under Section 143(1)(a), disallowing all expenses and exemptions, leading to tax demands. The assessee's appeals to the CIT(A) were dismissed due to delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the disallowances made by the CPC under Section 143(1)(a) without proper verification are valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)(a),Section 11,Section 12,Section 249(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR “A” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “A” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No: 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21

Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Income Tax Sewa Samiti Officer, Vs Village Irolav, Tejya Ka Baas, Exemption Tehsil-Phulera, Jaipur. Ward-1, PAN: AAQAS2196E Jaipur (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee Represented: Sh. Kamal Kishore Sharma, Jaipur Revenue Represented: Sh. Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 10-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 20-08-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

Aforesaid interconnected appeals have been filed by the Assessee - Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti challenging the impugned orders passed by Adddl/JCIT(A), Jaipur, both dated 17.12.2025 for the assessment years 2019-20 & 2020-21 on the ground inter-alia that:- ITA No. 374/JPR/2026 (A.Y. 2019-20)

I.T.A No. 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Page No 2 Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti

“1. The learned AddI/JCIT(A) has seriously erred in law and facts in rejecting the application for condonation of delay and dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation under section 249(2) of the Act.

2.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law expenses claimed in ITR cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1), and therefore the order made by the CPC is illegal, void ab initio and without jurisdiction hence the same needs to be quashed by your honor.

3.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CPC has erred in not allowing the exemption under section 11 and 12 and assessing income equal to the Gross Receipt of Rs. 42,91,400.00 even without allowing the deduction of revenue expenses of Rs. 44,67,189.00 incurred by the assessee. The action of the CPC is illegal and unjustified arbitrary and against the fact of the case. Relief may please be granted by allowing deduction of expenditure from gross receipt besides confirming the exemption Under section 11.

4.

AddI/JCIT(A) has passed order without giving opportunity of being heard which is against the principles of natural justice and thus the order need to be quashed.

5.

The appellant prays for leave to add, alter, amend the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing of appeal.”

ITA No. 375/JPR/2026 (A.Y. 2020-21)

“1. The learned AddI/JCIT(A) has seriously erred in law and facts in rejecting the application for condonation of delay and dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation under section 249(2) of the Act.

2.

CPC has grossly erred in not issuing prior intimation-as specified in first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) before making the disallowance, hence the order made by CPC is illegal, void ab initio and need to be quashed by your honor.

3.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Exemption claimed under section 11 cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1), and therefore the order made by the CPC is illegal, void ab initio and without jurisdiction hence the same needs to be quashed by your honor.

4.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CPC has erred in not allowing the exemption under section 11 and 12 consequently adding

I.T.A No. 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Page No 3 Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti

Gross Receipt of Rs. 56,95,775 to the total income of the assessee even without allowing the deduction of revenue expenses of Rs. 52,21,036 incurred by the assessee and rejecting the exemption claimed without any verification. The action of the CPC is illegal and unjustified arbitrary and against the fact of the case. Relief may please be granted by allowing the exemption under section 11, besides allowing any other relief as the Court may deem fit in this case.

5.

Addl or JCIT(A) and CPC both have passed orders without giving opportunity of being heard which is against the principles of natural justice and thus both the orders need to be quashed.

6.

The appellant prays for leave to add, alter, amend the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing of appeal.”

2.

Briefly stated, facts necessary for adjudication and consideration of the issues at hand are: Assessee society being registered under Rajasthan Registration Act and having been registered u/s 12A/12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) is receiving government subsidies to carry out its objects and the assessee trust filed return of income at the gross receipt of Rs. 42,91,400/- with the revenue expenditure of Rs. 44,67,189/- and capital expenditure of Rs. 3,27,700/- resulting in a deficit for A.Y. 2019-20. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act by the Centralized Processing Centre (hereinafter referred as to the “CPC”) by disallowing the entire expenditure and assessed total income at Rs. 42,91,400/- with tax demand of Rs. 14,47,018/-. 3. Likewise in assessment year 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income and disclosing gross receipt of Rs. 56,95,775/-,

I.T.A No. 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Page No 4 Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti

which was processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act by CPC making disallowance of all revenue expenditure and exemption u/s 11 and thereby raised a demand of Rs.21,06,605/-. 4. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed both appeals filed by the assessee trust in limine by not condoning the delay in filing the appeals for A.Ys. 2019- 20 and 2020-21 delayed by 90 days and 149 days respectively, by not condoning the delay. 5. Aggrieved with the impugned orders passed by Ld. CIT(A), assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 6. We have heard Ld. ARs for the assessee and Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the record available on file. 7. Bare perusal of the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) with the assistance of the Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeals, it has come up record that intervening period causing delay fell within COVID-19 pandemic. Ld. CIT(A) very minutely examined the issue in the light of the Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 01.10.2022, whereby limitation was extended but still by granting benefit of the extended limitation granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appeals filed by the assessee was beyond the period of limitation.

I.T.A No. 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Page No 5 Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti

8.

We are of the considered view that in the COVID-19 pandemic a dark period in the human history, the issue of limitation cannot be examined with clinical precision and liberal interpretation to the principals of considering delay has to be given. Even otherwise this assessee society which is into the charitable activities for the welfare and maintenance of stray, sick old cows is not being managed by expert staff who can guide them to file the appeals within limitation. 9. One of the ground for condonation of delay is that intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 10.11.2020 was served upon him on 30.03.2022. Again when the intimation is given through email, illiterate population engaged in such activities is not tech savvy to act strictly in accordance with law. It will take some time for most of the population to be digitally diligent. 10. Keeping in view what has been discussed above, we are of the considered view that when all facts are examined in the light of the settled principle that one should not be condemned unheard and reasonable opportunity of being heard is required to be given, we find “sufficient cause” to condone the delay in both the appeals filed by the assessee-society for A.Ys. 2019-20 & 2020-21 before the Ld. CIT(A). 11. Since, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals on the ground of maintainability, the same are required to be heard on merits.

I.T.A No. 374 & 375/JPR/2026 Page No 6 Shri Bawaliya Baba Gaushala Sewa Samiti

Consequently, both the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) are set aside, to be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh on merits. 12. Resultantly, both appeals filed by the assessee society are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-08-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 20/08/2026. *Santosh. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- 2. The Respondent- 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. Guard File By order,

Asst. Registrar

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →