SHAKTI VAHINI,NEW DELHI vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3410/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Shakti Vahini, Vs. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), 143, DDA, Janta Flats, Ward- Exemption 2(1), Badarpur, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AARFS4248P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Gautam Goyal, CA Department by Sh. Balkishan Gopal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 30.07.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2022-23, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1079878840(1), dated 22.08.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

ITA No.3410/Del/2026

Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Delay of 150 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. Suffice to say, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed section 11 exemption claim(s) to the assessee; for the sole reason that it could not file/upload the prescribed 10B tax audit report within “due” date of filing section 139(1) return. The Revenue vehemently argues that the impugned disallowance of section 11 exemption deserves to be upheld as the above compliance is mandatory in nature. 4. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in light of CIT vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd., [2014] 41 taxmann.com 184 (Guj.) has already settled the issue in assessee’s favour that the foregoing compliance of filing/upholding Form 10B tax audit report is only directory than mandatory in nature. That being the case, we find merit in the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance and direct the learned Assessing Officer to frame its consequential computation as per law after verifying all the relevant facts. 2 | P a g e

ITA No.3410/Del/2026

No other ground or argument has been pressed before us. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th July, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 18th August, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e