SARVODAY SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL JAYSINGPUR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 168/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 August 2026AY 2019-206 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently caused by the assessee pursuing rectification and the COVID-19 pandemic. It also noted that the assessee had filed Form 10BB within the due time, and taxing the entire receipts without considering expenditures was incorrect.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust filed its return of income, but the CPC processed it under Section 143(1) and taxed the entire gross receipts, disallowing claimed exemptions and expenditures. The reason cited was the non-filing of Form 10B. The assessee appealed this order after a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the entire gross receipts could be taxed due to non-filing of Form 10B when Form 10BB was filed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 250,Section 12A(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Sachin P Kumar
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT-DR

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Hyderabad [Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for AY 2019-20 on 21.11.2025.

Submission of Ld. AR :

2.

The Ld. AR filed paper book containing 105 pages. The Ld. AR filed written submission. The relevant paragraphs of the written submitted are as under : “37. However, the Ld. CPC, Bengaluru had taxed the entire gross receipts claimed by the appellant trust on the ground that the appellant trust had not filed the Form 10B. 38. Even if Form 10B was not filed, still no provision of law allows the authority to completely tax the receipts without giving due

ITA No. 168/PUN/2026

consideration to the expenditures done in regard to the same. Such an act is untenable and not acceptable in the eyes of law.

39.However, it was not appreciated that the appellant trust had filed Form 10BB well within the prescribed time limit and there are various judgments of the various Courts and Tribunals wherein it has been held that non-filing of Form 10B or delay in filing Form 10B is a procedural lapse and that exemption cannot be denied merely on this ground.

40.

Rather, it is to submit that there is no procedural lapse in the case of the appellant as the appellant has rightly filed Form 10BB. Your Honour may kindly be pleased to appreciate the fact that 10B form is to be filed in cases where registration is granted u/s 10(23C) from AY 2022-23 onwards, if the receipts were more than Rs. 5 crores as per Rule 16CC and Rule 17B.

41.

The case under consideration is of AY 2019-20 and the appellant trust was entitled to file Form 10BB only, which has not been accepted in intimation order passed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act by the CPC, Bengaluru.

42.

The relevant extracts from the literature in this regard as available on IT Website is reproduced herewith for your Honour's kind reference and also attached as an Annexure with this paper book.

"Vide Notification No. 7/2023 (dated 21st February 2023) the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has notified new audit reports in Form 10B and Form 10BB to be furnished by a fund or trust or institution or any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution under section 12A(1) and under tenth proviso to section 10(23C):

➤ Form No. 10B where-

 The total income of auditee, without giving effect to the provisions of mentioned clause/section, as applicable-

 sub-clauses (iv), (v), (vi) and (via) of clause 23C of section 10 or Sections 11 and 12 of the Act, exceeds rupees five crores during the previous year, or

 Auditee has received any foreign contribution during the previous year, or

 Auditee has applied any part of its income outside India during the previous year.

ITA No. 168/PUN/2026

➤ Form No. 10BB in other cases.”

2.1 The Ld. AR relied on the following decisions : i. Indian Association of Parliamentarians on Population & Development Vs. Income Tax Officer, War Exemption-1(2), ITA No. 5202/DEL/2025. ii. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Vs. P K Krishnan Educational Trust, Mumbai on 7 May, 2024. iii. Sarvodaya Charitable Trust Vs. ITO (Exemption) (2021) (125 com 75) (Gujarat). iv. ACIT, Cir-8, Ahmedabad Vs. Xavier Kelvani Mandal Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT Vs. Shahzedanand Charity Trust (1997) 228 ITR 292 (PH).

Submission of Ld. DR :

3.

The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A).

Findings and analysis:

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the record. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) passed u/s. 250 of the Act for AY 2019-20 on 21.11.2025, emanating from the assessment order u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 17.06.2020. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) vide order u/s 250 of the Act has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on account of delay in filing the appeal of 1679 days.

5.

In this case, the assessee had filed return of income on 31.08.2019 u/s 139(1) of the Act. The said return was processed by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC) and an order u/s 143(1) of the Act was passed on 17.06.2020 assessing

ITA No. 168/PUN/2026 the income of the assessee at Rs.6,14,25,854/- without giving deduction of expenditures claimed by the assessee in the return of income and without granting exemption claimed by the assessee in the return of income. The reason given by the CPC is as under : “The Trust or Institution registered u/s 12A/12AA has not E-filed the Audit Report in Form 10B on or before filing of the Return of income, hence the exemption claimed in Sr.no. 2 [exemption claimed u/s 11(1)(d)] and Sr.no. 4i to 4viii of Part B-TI is not allowed in accordance with the provisions of Section-12A(1)(b) of the Income tax Act. PS: Filing of Form 9A within due date is mandatory if there is claim of deemed application in Sr.no. 4iv of Schedule Part B-TI. Filing of Form 10 and return of income within due date is mandatory if claim of accumulation u/s 11(2) in Sr.no. 4vi of Schedule Part B-TI”

6.

Aggrieved by the assessment order u/s 143(1) of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) with a delay. The assessee filed elaborate condonation affidavit before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has reproduced the condonation affidavit in the order. It is observed that after receiving the order u/s 143(1) of the Act, the assessee had filed request for rectification. Since, the assessee had not received any response from the CPC, the assessee raised grievance on Income Tax Portal on 26.12.2024 and on 12.01.2025. Finally, since no response was received, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). Thus, when we analyse the chronology of events, it is observed that the assessee was pursuing an alternate remedy in the form of rectification application. It is also observed that the period was Covid Pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has extended the due dates. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that there was sufficient cause for delay.

ITA No. 168/PUN/2026

Accordingly, we direct the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) to condone the delay.

7.

In this case, it is observed that the assessee had received 96% grants from Government. The assessee’s total receipts were Rs.6,14,25,853/- as per Income & Expenditure Account and surplus was only Rs.6,19,158/-. However, erroneously the CPC has taxed the entire receipts. Under the Income Tax Act, there is no provision where entire receipts can be taxed ignoring expenditure claimed. It is also noted that the assessee had filed audit report in Form No. 10BB within the due time allowed u/s 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, there was no delay on the part of the assessee in filing audit report. In these facts and circumstances of the case, if we do not condone the delay, grave injustice will be caused to the assessee. Therefore, for all the reasons discussed above, we direct the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits. Accordingly, order u/s 250 is set aside to Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) shall allow assessee to file all the necessary documents. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 17th August, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 17-08-2026 Digitally signed by Ravi Ravi Kumar Ravi Kumar Kumar Date: 2026.08.18 12:24:17 +05'30'

ITA No. 168/PUN/2026

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 12A(1)(b)

All 171 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A(1)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →