SHRI GURUMAULI SEVABHAVI SANSTHA,NASHIK vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHK

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2685 & 2686/PUN/2026 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Gurumauli Sevabhavi Vs. ITO, Exemption Ward- Sanstha, 1(1), Pune. Mauli Vrudhashram, Behind Kalaram Mandir, Ward No.7, Shrirampur, Dist- Ahilyanagar – 413709. PAN : AAVTS5324G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ramkrishna P. Daware Revenue by : Smt. R. M. Brindha Date of hearing : 30.07.2026 Date of pronouncement : 31.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 30.04.2026 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively. 2. Since the facts are identical and both the appeals were heard together, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order.

2 ITA Nos.2685 & 2686/PUN/2026 ITA No.2685/PUN/2026, A.Y. 2018-19 : 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a trust and has filed its return of income on 30.08.2018 by declaring income of Rs.Nil after claiming exemption. The return was processed by CPC after making certain adjustments resulting into income of Rs.1,23,399/- & demand of Rs.45,770/-. 4. Being aggrieved with the above intimation order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was furnished belatedly, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay and without going into merits of the case. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that the first appellate authority has not gone into the merits of the case and dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay itself. In this regard, we find that the assessee is small charitable trust engaged in the activity of skill development, rural education and women empowerment and in

3 ITA Nos.2685 & 2686/PUN/2026 the absence of proper guidance furnished its return of income by claiming exemption u/s 10 of the IT Act instead of u/s 11 of the IT Act. At the same time, the office bearers of the assessee trust were not aware with the procedure of appeal filing etc, therefore, the first appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time limit before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. The delay in filing of first appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC also includes Covid period. It was the contention of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate but occurred on account of bona-fide reasons. It was also the contention of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that in the light of judgement passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji 167 ITR 471 (SC), delay in filing of first appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned and the matter may kindly be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for passing a speaking order afresh as per fact and law. 7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to condone the delay and decide the

4 ITA Nos.2685 & 2686/PUN/2026 appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce relevant documents, submissions and evidences, if any, in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.2685/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2018-19 is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.2686/PUN/2026, A.Y. 2019-20 : 9. Since the facts and issues involved in the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2686/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2019-20 are identical to the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2685/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2018-19 therefore, our decision in ITA No.2685/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2018-19 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2686/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2019-20.

5 ITA Nos.2685 & 2686/PUN/2026 Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2686/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2019-20 is also allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.2686/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2019-20 is allowed for statistical purposes. 11. To sum up, both the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above. Order pronounced on this 31st day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 31st July, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Sujeet Kumar Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.07.31 14:56:06 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.