KURTADE PANCHKROSHI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2656/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2026AY 2019-20204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). It held that the assessee's failure to mention Section 12A registration was an inadvertent error, and the trust is eligible for exemption under Sections 11 and 12.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust running an educational institute, failed to mention its Section 12A registration details while filing its original and revised returns of income. This led to the denial of exemption under Section 11 by the CPC. The appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of exemption under Section 11 due to non-mention of Section 12A registration in the return, despite having valid registration, is justified. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was condonable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12A,Section 12

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH: MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Hearing: 21.05.2026Pronounced: 22.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“E” BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2656/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Kurtade Panchkroshi Income Tax Officer, Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Exemption Ward-1(4), Mumbai 104, Kulkarni Heights, Chitale vs. 6th Floor, MTNL Telephone Path, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Exchange Building, Cumballa Maharashtra, 400028 Hill, Pedder Road, MUMBAI, Maharashtra, 400026 PAN: AAATK2997A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ashish Thakurdesai For Revenue : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR.DR Date of Hearing : 21.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), ADDL/JCIT (A)-1 Chennai [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 24.02.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20.

2.

During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a charitable trust, running educational institute at Ratnagiri and it is duly registered with the Charity Commissioner and has also requisite approval u/s. 12A and 80G of the Act. It was submitted that it has filed its return of income on 23.09.2019 claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) on 18.05.2022.

ITA No. 2656/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2019-20 Kurtade Panchkroshi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal However, the claim of exemption u/s 11 was denied to the assessee trust apparently for the reason that the details of the registration u/s. 12A was not mentioned while filing the return of income. It was submitted that the assessee thereafter filed a revised return on 24.06.2020, wherein, also admittedly, the assessee did not mention the details of the registration obtained u/s. 12A of the Act. It was submitted that as a result, even in the revised intimation so issued by the CPC dated 22.10.2020, the demand has been sustained by the CPC denying the exemption claim u/s. 11 of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the same has been dismissed on account of delayed filing. It was submitted that the assessee has narrated the sequence of events as well as filed a detailed affidavit before the ld. CIT(A) explaining the reason for the delay in filing of the appeal. However, the same has not been appreciated and the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed.

3.

It was submitted that it is an admitted fact that the assessee is duly registered u/s. 12A of the Act, under the earlier regime and it has also obtained the necessary registration under the new registration regime and therefore the assessee is eligible for claim of exemption u/s. 11 and 12 of the Act. It was submitted that it was only due to the inadvertent error that while filing the return of income, the details of the registration u/s. 12A was not mentioned and as a result, the CPC while processing the return of income has denied the claim of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. It was accordingly submitted that the matter may be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer to take into consideration the registration so granted u/s. 12A of the Act which is a matter of record and allow the necessary exemption u/s. 11 and 12 of the Act.

4.

The ld. DR has been heard, who has fairly submitted that the matter can be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for necessary examination of registration so granted u/s. 12A of the Act.

ITA No. 2656/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2019-20 Kurtade Panchkroshi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal

5.

After hearing both the parties and considering the material available record, we find that there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Further, it is noted that the assessee is registered u/s. 12A of the Act and it is due to the inadvertent error while filing the original as well as the revised return of income that the details of the registration u/s. 12A was not mentioned resulting in denial of claim of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. In light of the same, given the limited prayer so raised by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee which has not been seriously objected by the ld. DR, the matter is set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to take into consideration the registration so granted and allow the necessary exemption u/s. 11 and 12 of the Act in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

Mumbai, Dated: 22.05.2026 Karishma J. Pawar, SR. PS

Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file

ITA No. 2656/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2019-20 Kurtade Panchkroshi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal By Order

Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →