JEEVAN JYOT CANCER RELIEF & CARE TUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO - EXEM. WARD 1(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Jeevan Jyot Cancer ITO Exem Ward 1(4) Relief & Care Trust Income Tax Appellate Vs. 3/9, Kondaji Chawl, Tribunal, Mumbai- Jerabai Wadia Road, 400 020 Mumbai-400 012 PAN/GIR No. AAATJ2299Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Dinkle Haria (virtually appeared), Ld. AR Revenue by Shree Kumar C., Ld. DR Date of Hearing 02.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 07.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[hereinafter referred to as "the CIT(A)"], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] for the assessment

2 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust year 2016-17, arising from the assessment order dated 13.12.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Act.

3 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust 3.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, no such addition was called for. 3.3 Without prejudice to the above, assuming – but not admitting – that some addition was called for, it is submitted that the computation of the addition made by the A.O. is arbitrary, excessive and not in accordance with the law. 4. LIBERTY The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any the above ground at the time of hearing. Condonation of delay

4 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust mail addresses had been used in the returns of income and on the e-filing portal during different periods. For the assessment years 2016-17 to 2023-24, the e-mail address appearing in the return was stated to be office@navinca.in, whereas the primary e-mail address reflected on the e-filing portal during the relevant period was navinca859@gmail.com. The address mentioned in Form No. 35 was navinca85@gmail.com. These e-mail addresses were stated to be under the control of the office of the said trustee and his staff. 6. It has further been explained that notices dated 02.07.2025 and 13.08.2025 issued during the appellate proceedings remained unattended. The person entrusted with monitoring the relevant e-mail address, Shri Karan Visariya, was stated to be preoccupied with statutory deadlines relating to filing of returns and tax audits and thereafter left the employment of the chartered accountant sometime in July or August 2025. According to the assessee, the Managing Trustee and the trust were therefore unaware that the notices had remained unattended. 7. The assessee has stated that the ex parte order dated 26.08.2025 did not come to the knowledge of the trust or its Managing Trustee and that the assessee became aware of the said order only towards the end of March 2026, when its present tax auditor verified the status of the appeal on the income-tax e- filing portal. It has been submitted that, immediately upon acquiring knowledge of the order, the assessee collected the

5 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust relevant records, sought professional advice and filed the appeal without avoidable delay. 8. The learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor attributable to any mala fide conduct. He submitted that the assessee is a public charitable trust carrying on charitable activities for cancer patients and that the delay arose on account of the peculiar circumstances relating to the handling of electronic communications. It was further submitted that the assessee had filed the first appeal within the prescribed period and had no intention to abandon the appellate remedy. 9. The learned Departmental Representative (DR), on consideration of the condonation petition and the affidavit, raised no objection to the condonation of delay. 10. We have considered the application, the affidavit and the submissions of both sides. The explanation furnished by the assessee shows that the delay arose because the electronic notices and the impugned order were not brought to the attention of the Managing Trustee. The chronology stated in the affidavit is reasonably supported by the particulars of the different e-mail addresses, the person responsible for monitoring the communications and the subsequent discovery of the order on the e-filing portal. The Revenue has also not disputed the factual explanation and the learned DR has expressly raised no objection to the condonation of delay. The assessee, after gaining

6 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust knowledge of the impugned order towards the end of March 2026, filed the appeal on 18.04.2026. Thus, there is no material delay after the assessee acquired actual knowledge of the order. In the circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. We accordingly condone the delay of 169 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. Brief facts of the case 11. The assessee is a public charitable trust registered under section 12A of the Act with the Director of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai, under Registration No. TR/33213. It is also registered with the Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. The assessee is engaged in charitable activities, including rendering assistance and relief to cancer patients.For the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee electronically filed its return of income on 17.10.2016 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The return was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 05.07.2017. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) read with section 129 of the Act dated 11.06.2018, 27.08.2018 and 06.11.2018 were issued calling for details and documents. 12. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had claimed accumulation of income of Rs. 1,68,23,817/- under section 11(2) of the Act read with Rule 17(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. In Form No. 10, the purpose

7 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust of accumulation was mentioned as “All Object of the Trust”. The assessee explained before the Assessing Officer that the amount had been set apart for setting up a building for treatment and care of cancer patients. It was submitted that the proposed building was intended to provide facilities for preliminary stay, care and treatment of cancer patients and that, since the project involved multiple activities relating to such care and treatment, the purpose had been described as “All objects of the trust”. 13. The Assessing Officer did not accept the explanation. According to him, section 11(2) required the purpose of accumulation to be specified in a definite, concrete and particular manner. He held that a general reference to all the objects of the trust was vague and did not satisfy the statutory requirement. He further observed that, had the assessee intended to utilise the amount for construction of a hospital or a specific building project, an appropriate resolution ought to have been passed and recorded in the minutes book. The Assessing Officer accordingly denied the benefit of accumulation claimed under section 11(2) of the Act and completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act on 13.12.2018. The gross receipts were taken at Rs. 3,14,37,510/-. Expenditure of Rs. 1,32,04,507/- on revenue account and Rs. 14,09,187/- on capital account was allowed. The total income was determined at Rs. 1,68,23,816/-, rounded off under section 288A to Rs. 1,68,23,820/-. 14. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The appeal was subsequently migrated to the National

8 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust Faceless Appeal Centre. Notices under section 250 of the Act were issued on 19.02.2021, 21.02.2024, 02.07.2025 and 13.08.2025. The assessee sought adjournments on earlier occasions but did not make compliance with the final notice fixed for hearing on 19.08.2025. 15. The CIT(A) observed that no written submissions, documents or evidence had been filed during the appellate proceedings, apart from the statement of facts and grounds of appeal filed along with Form No. 35. He held that the assessee had failed to prosecute the appeal effectively and had not controverted the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer. 16. The CIT(A), therefore, proceeded ex parte and confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 26.08.2025 passed under section 250 of the Act. 17. Before us, the learned AR submitted that the impugned order had been passed ex parte without adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merits. He submitted that the non-compliance before the CIT(A) was neither deliberate nor intentional and arose because the notices were sent to e-mail addresses monitored by the office of the erstwhile consultant and were not brought to the notice of the Managing Trustee. 18. The learned AR further submitted that the assessee had placed a detailed explanation before the Assessing Officer regarding the purpose for which the income was accumulated. According to him, the accumulation was intended for establishing

9 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust a building and facilities for treatment and care of cancer patients and the expression “All objects of the trust” had been used only because the proposed project comprised various interconnected charitable activities. 19. It was submitted that the CIT(A), being the first appellate authority, was required to decide the grounds on merits after examining the assessment order, the statement of facts and the material available on record. Instead, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal substantially on the ground of non-prosecution and confirmed the addition without an independent examination of the merits. 20. The learned AR therefore prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee an effective opportunity of hearing. 21. The learned DR relied upon the order of the CIT(A). However, he did not seriously object to restoration of the matter to the first appellate authority, subject to a direction that the assessee should cooperate in the proceedings and furnish the requisite submissions and evidence. 22. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. The CIT(A) has recorded that four notices under section 250 of the Act were issued and that the assessee did not file submissions or supporting evidence. On that

10 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust basis, the CIT(A) proceeded ex parte and confirmed the assessment. 23. It is, however, evident from the impugned order that the principal issue before the CIT(A) concerned the assessee’s eligibility for accumulation under section 11(2) of the Act. The issue required examination of Form No. 10, the resolution of the trust, the stated purpose of accumulation and the explanation furnished before the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) did not undertake an independent examination of these aspects. The addition was confirmed principally because the assessee failed to make compliance during the appellate proceedings. 24. An appeal before the CIT(A) is a continuation of the assessment proceedings. The first appellate authority is required to adjudicate the grounds raised before him by passing a speaking order on the basis of the material available on record. Even where an assessee fails to appear or make further submissions, the appeal cannot be disposed of merely for want of prosecution. The CIT(A) is required to examine the grounds and decide the issues arising from the assessment order on merits. 25. In the present case, the assessee has explained the circumstances which resulted in non-compliance before the CIT(A). The notices were sent to e-mail addresses handled by the office of an erstwhile consultant and the person assigned to monitor the relevant e-mail account is stated to have left the employment. The explanation may require factual verification,

11 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust but it cannot be said to be inherently improbable. The assessee has also filed a sworn affidavit of its Managing Trustee affirming these facts. 26. Since the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the controversy relating to section 11(2) of the Act on merits, we are of the considered view that the assessee should be afforded one more opportunity to present its case before the first appellate authority. At the same time, the assessee cannot remain passive after invoking the appellate jurisdiction. It shall be incumbent upon the assessee to furnish all relevant submissions, resolutions, Form No. 10, supporting documents and judicial authorities before the CIT(A) within the time allowed and to cooperate in the fresh appellate proceedings. 27. We therefore set aside the impugned order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act and restore the appeal to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The CIT(A) shall provide a reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee and shall decide all the grounds raised before him by a reasoned and speaking order. 28. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the assessee’s claim under section 11(2) of the Act. All contentions of both parties are left open for adjudication by the CIT(A).

12 ITA No. 4506/Mum/2026 Jeevan Jyot Cancer Relief & Care Trust 29. In view of the restoration of the matter, Ground Nos. 1 to 3 are allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. 4 is general in nature and requires no separate adjudication.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 07/07/2026 Dhananjay, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबंधधत आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधनधध, आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, मुम्बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// 1. उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai