SHRI VITHALRAO JOSHI CHARITIES TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,EXEM. CIRCLE 2,MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Since the issues involved in all these appeals are common and identical and pertain to the same assessee, they were clubbed together, heard together, and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

I shall first take up ITA No. 3750/Mum/2026. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

At the very outset, I noticed that there is a delay of approximately 912 days in filing the appeal before me. In this regard, an affidavit has been placed on record. Having considered the entire factual position as set out in the affidavit, and also keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [1987 AIR 1353 (SC)], wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitted against the technicalities of a non-deliberate delay, substantial justice is to be preferred, I am of the view that the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence, considering the explanation put forth by the assessee, who has justifiably and properly explained the delay that occurred in filing the appeal, and construing the expression "sufficient cause"

I have heard the counsel for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, the judgments cited before me, and also the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. From the records, I noticed that the assessee trust was established on 23.08.1977 with the objective of carrying out charitable activities in the social, educational, and medical fields in the Konkan region. As per the records, the trust has been registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 and is also registered under Sections 12A and 80G of the Act. Therefore, the trust claims exemption under Section 11 of the Act in respect of the income earned from the property held under the trust.

For the year under consideration, the assessee trust has claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act in respect of the income earned by the Hospital, Medical College, and School Trust. However, the case was selected for scrutiny, and according to the Ld. AR, the assessee trust had made detailed submissions explaining that the assessee trust was justified in claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act in respect of the income from the medical store. However, the AO, disregarding the contentions of the assessee, denied the exemption and added the surplus to the total income of the assessee trust.

Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), but according to the Ld. AR, the documents submitted by the assessee and the decisions relied upon were not considered by the Ld.

Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee, and considering the fact that the documents placed on record and the judicial precedents relied upon by the assessee were not duly considered by the Ld. CIT(A), I am of the view that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, considering the overall circumstances of the present case, I deem it proper to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh after providing adequate and sufficient opportunity of hearing, subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000/- imposed upon the assessee, which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. A copy of the receipt shall be placed on record before the Ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of the proceedings.

Before parting, I wish to make it clear that our decision to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as reflecting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated independently by the Ld. CIT(A) in accordance with law.

Needless to mention, the Ld. CIT(A) shall provide an adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of the proceedings.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to ITA No 3750/Mum/2026 for the A.Y 2015-16 therefore, the decision rendered in above paragraphs would apply mutatis mutandis for theses appeal also.