MAHILA PUNARWAS SAMOOH SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 302/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 August 2026AY 2023-246 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to communication issues. It further held that the audited accounts provided sufficient details for the claimed revenue expenditure, which was necessary for running the society.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, failed to provide required details for its Section 12A registration, leading to the Assessing Officer framing an assessment at Rs. 8,40,507/-. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance and also dismissed the claim for revenue expenditure under Section 57(iii).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is justifiable, and whether the revenue expenditure claimed by the assessee is allowable under Section 57(iii) based on audited accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 57(iii),Section 11

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: 302/JPR/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24

Mahila Punarwas Samooh Exemption Samiti Ward-1, C/o CA R.S. Poonia, D-82-B, Vs Jaipur Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, (Respondent) Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. PAN: AAATM5594M (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri R.S. Poonia, C. A. Revenue Represented: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 05-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 13-08-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

Applicant-Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti by moving a separate application sought to condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present appeal, on the grounds inter-alia that email ID recorded in Form no. 35 RENUKAPAMECHA@YAHOO.CO.IN for transmitting the notices has not been used, however notices were sent by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC on email ID PRABHARAVIN@GMAIL.COM; that the appellant

I.T.A No. 302/JPR/2026 Page No 2 Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti

society has never received any notice; that the appellant had submitted written submission supported with documentary evidence, but its counsel failed to check the Income Tax Portal, and as such could not get information that order has been passed in first appeal; that managing persons of the appellant society were not conversant with the provisions of the Income Tax Act nor was not informed the status of their pending appeal; that when the Income Tax Portal was checked on 24.06.2025, they came to know about the impugned order; that the delay in filing the present appeal is not intentional rather beyond the control of the appellant. 2. Ld. DR for the Revenue opposed the application on the ground that when the appellant has engaged the lawyer to pursue the appeal, it is not believable that they were not aware of the passing of the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the application. 3. Bare perusal of the impugned order goes to prove that during the appeal proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) the appellant demanded personal hearing by video conference, which was reportedly granted vide notice dated 17.06.2025, but the assessee failed to avail of that opportunity. When the assessee has come up with the categoric submission that none of the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) has sent to him on email ID recorded in Form No. 35, a “sufficient cause” is made out in favour of

I.T.A No. 302/JPR/2026 Page No 3 Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti

the appellant to have reasonable presumption that appeal is still pending and being not supported by competent managerial staff failed to collect the information from the Income Tax Portal. In these circumstances we find sufficient cause to condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is ordered to be registered to be disposed off on merit. The Appellant, Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samit by filing 4. the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] qua the assessment order for Assessment year 2023-24 on the grounds inter-alia that:- “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(Appeals), is wrong and has erred in law in not allowing the deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of revenue expenditure, kindly allow the revenue expenditure.

2.

That the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of the above grounds of appeal or to withdraw any of them.”

Briefly stated, facts necessary for consideration and 5. adjudication of the issues at hand are : The appellant trust filed return of income for A.Y. 2023-24 declaring Nil income by

I.T.A No. 302/JPR/2026 Page No 4 Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti

claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, however registration u/s 12A of the Act filed by the assessee was not granted on failure of the assessee to furnish required details including bills/vouchers for expenses and bank account statements, and as such genuine charitable activities if being carried out by the appellant trust could not be verified. The Assessing Officer framed assessment at the total income of Rs. 8,40,507/- on the failure of the appellant to substantiate the genuineness of the voluntary contributions of Rs. 8,40,507/- as no details of donors identities, creditworthiness, or the nature of transactions were provided. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made by the AO. Ld. CIT(A) and also dismissed the additional grounds raised by the appellant seeking allowance of Revenue expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,79,587/- u/s 57(iii) of the Act on the ground that no documentary evidence has been brought on record. We have heard Ld. ARs for the appellant and Ld. DR for the 6. Revenue and perused the record available on file.

I.T.A No. 302/JPR/2026 Page No 5 Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti

7.

At the very outset, it is undisputed fact on record that the appellant trust has been into charitable activities for rehabilitation of women and was getting exemption u/s 11 of the Act, however on failure on the part of the financial advisor engaged by the society, they could not furnish their required details including bills/vouchers for expenses and bank accounts in Form No. 10AB leading to the dismissal of their application for registration u/s 12A of the Act. 8. In this background, when we examine audited income and expenditure account and balance sheet along with the audit report at page 27 to 35 of the paper book with the assistance of the Ld. DR for the Revenue, there is a complete details of expenditure claimed by the appellant before the Ld. CIT(A). There is no reason on record to dispute the audited accounts/reports. At the same time, keeping in view the smallness of the amount claimed by the assessee as a Revenue expenditure, even details of the expenditure account at page 27 of the paper book goes to prove that none of the expenditure is doubtful being necessary in nature to run the society which has earlier been held to be into charitable activities in the preceding years. 9. In view of what has been discussed above, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside to the extent that Revenue

I.T.A No. 302/JPR/2026 Page No 6 Mahila Punarwas Samooh Samiti

expenditure of Rs. 3,79,587/- is allowed u/s 57(iii) of the Act. The Assessing Officer is directed to proceed accordingly. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant trust is accordingly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13-08-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 13/08/2026. *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 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →