ITO, ROHTAK vs. PIYARE LAL KISHAN LAL EDUCATIONAL & SOCIAL TRUST, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6416/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that while the assessee's activities were not denied in principle, the expenses were not fully proven to the satisfaction of the AO. Therefore, a lumpsum addition of Rs. 5 lakhs was made to meet the ends of justice.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to delete disallowances of expenses incurred by the assessee on clothes and cows. The assessee's trust had registrations under sections 12AA and 80.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of expenses for clothes and cows was justified, and if not, what would be the appropriate addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 12AA,Section 80

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

Hearing: 01.07.2026Pronounced: 01.07.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 6416/Del/2025
C.O. No. 265/Del/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6416/Del/2025 with C.O. No. 265/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Income Tax Officer Vs Piyare Lal Kishan Lal Room No. 115, Aaykar Bhawan, Educational Trust Opposite Mansarovar Park, House No. 973, Sector-14, Rohtak- 124001 Hisar- 125001 Haryana Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent/Cross-Objector) PAN No. AAAAP8773A

Assessee by: Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sudip Majumdar, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing: 01.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 01.07.2026 ORDER This Revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s cross objection i.e., ITA No. 6416/Del/2025 & CO No. 265/Del/2025 for assessment year 2017-18 arise against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short, ‘CIT(A)/NFAC’) order dated 14.08.2025 passed in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079654905(1), involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

2 2. The Revenue vehemently argues during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in reversing the assessment findings inter alia disallowing the assessee’s expenses incurred in purchase of clothes etc amounting to Rs. 1,59,11,000/- and Rs. 15,08,800/- as well as that incurred on cows/nandis to the tune of Rs. 43,80,134/-; respectively. Learned Departmental Representative’s case accordingly is that we ought to go by the Assessing Officer’s detailed reasoning rejecting the assessee’s impugned claims in light of overwhelming supportive material that the same are bogus in nature. The assessee, on the other hand, strongly supports the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion that both these disallowances have been rightly deleted since separated by its cogent evidence filed in both the lower proceedings.

3.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the Revenue’s respective vehement submissions and find no reason to accept either of their stands in entirety. We make it clear first of all that the assessee’s trust herein enjoys both section 12AA as well as section 80 registration. There is further no quarrel that its activities duly stand accepted in principle as what all both the learned lower authorities have done is to disallow the clothes and cow expenses claim only asper the detailed tabulation given in page 3 of the assessment order. The fact also remains that the assessee could not plead and prove both these impugned expenses to the entire satisfaction of the learned Assessing Officer as well although its activities prima facie have not been denied in principle. We are of the considered view in this factual backdrop that a lumpsump addition of Rs. 5 lakhs under

3 these heads will meet the needs of justice with rider that the same shall not be treated as precedent. We order accordingly. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

4.

The Revenue’s instant appeal ITA No. 6416/Del/2025 succeeds in part.

5.

Learned counsel representing the assessee does not press for its cross-objection CO No. 265/Del/2025 . Rejected accordingly.

6.

These Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 6416/Del/2025 is partly allowed and the assessee’s cross-objection CO No. 265/Del/2025 is dismissed as not pressed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 01.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 15.07.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →