SHIKSHA SAMITI JANTA VIDYALAYA,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION WARD KANPUR

I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 1

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 Shiksha Samiti Janta Vidyalaya Vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption H-1717 Keshavpuram Kalyanpur- Aayakar Bhawan 16/69 Civil Lines, Uttar Pradesh-208001. 208017. PAN:AADAS1753J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Smt. Sonal Singh, JCIT (D.R.) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.193/Lkw/2025 has been filed by assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 14.01.2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072151649(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The grounds of appeal are as under:

“Ground No. 1 The ground of appeal has been raised against the Ld. AO not following the principles of natural justice while passing the assessment order. The Ld. AO had given ample opportunities to the assessee to substantiate his case. The appellant has also been granted opportunities in line with the principles of natural justice during the appellate proceedings. Hence, there is no cause of grievance. Ground No. 2 The ground of appeal is directed against denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO observed that the gross receipts of all the colleges are exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- and hence the society does not fall under the category of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act as also the assessee had filed the return of income u/s 139(1) belatedly. The submissions of the appellant

I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 2

have been perused. The gross consolidated receipts of the institutions of the appellant are Rs. 1,52,67,146/ which is more than the prescribed limits u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. In view of the foregoing, the appellant was not eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) during the A.Y. under consideration. The submissions of the appellant are rejected. Hence, the ground of appeal no. 2 is dismissed. Your honour is prayed to upheld this ground and allow the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act not allowed by LD. CIT(A). As appellant is claiming this exemption and allowed by the Income Tax Department on year to year basis since the assessment year 2018-19 to 2024-25 in the ITR-7 filed by the appellant. Ground No. 3 The ground of appeal is directed against an addition of Rs. 37,79,500/- u/s 68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, since the appellant did not produce the requisite documents in respect of the cash deposits during the demonetization period, the Ld. AO made the impugned addition to the income of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted additional evidence in respect of the cash deposits which are the details of the fees receipts from students from the institutions run by it. The submissions made by the appellant sufficiently explain the source of the cash deposits. Hence, the impugned addition made by the Ld. AO is directed to be deleted. The ground of appeal no. 3 is allowed. Your honour is prayed to maintain this ground as allowed & ordered by LD. CIT(A). Ground No. 4 The ground of appeal is directed against an addition of Rs. 34,81,603/- to the income of the appellant which is disallowance of 25% of the expenses of the assessee as held unexplained. During the course of assessment proceedings, since the appellant did not produce the requisite documents in respect of expenses incurred by it, the Ld. AO made a disallowance of 25% of the total expenses of Rs. 1,39,26,413/- and added it to the income of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted additional evidence in respect of the details of the salaries and allowances as well as expenditure incurred by the institutions run by it. The submissions made by the appellant sufficiently explain the nature of expenses made as disallowances by the Ld. AO. Hence, the impugned addition made by the Ld. AO is directed to be deleted. The ground of appeal no. 4 is allowed. Your honour is prayed to maintain this ground as allowed & ordered by LD. CIT(A). Ground No. 5 The ground of appeal is general in nature and does not require any adjudication.”

I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 3

(B) In this case, assessment order dated 24.12.2019 was passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.72,61,103/- as against returned income of Nil. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs.37,79,500/- was made u/s 68 of the Act. Further, a separate addition of Rs.34,81,603/- was made on account of cash deposits in the bank. Moreover, assessee’s claim for exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Act was declined. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was partly allowed by Ld. CIT(A(). Vide impugned appellate order date 14.01.2025, he deleted the aforesaid addition of Rs.37,79,500/- and 34,81,603/-. However, he confirmed the denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The relevant portion of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced below: -

“During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO observed that the gross receipts of all the colleges are exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- and hence the society does not fall under the category of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act as also the assessee had filed the return of income u/s 139(1) belatedly. The submissions of the appellant have been perused. The gross consolidated receipts of the institutions of the appellant are Rs. 1,52,67,146/- which is more than the prescribed limits u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. In view of the foregoing, the appellant was not eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiad) during the A.Y. under consideration. The submissions of the appellant are rejected. Hence, the ground of appeal no. 2 is dismissed.” (B.1) The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 14.01.2025. During the course of appellate proceedings, hearings were fixed from time to time. The Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee made a request for hearing through video conference. However, this request is infructuous because all hearings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) are filed in Hybrid mode and party can make appearance either in person, or through video conference.

I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 4

(B.2) The Ld. Counsel for the assessee was directed vide order-sheet dated 05.06.2025 to file concise grounds of appeal as per ITAT Rules 1963. The relevant provisions are contained in Rule 8 of IT(AT) Rules, 1963. Despite substantial lapse of time and a number of hearings fixed from time to time; however, the concise grounds of appeal have not been filed.

(C) At the time of hearing on 13.04.2026; there was no representation from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the ld. Departmental Representative was heard. She relied on the assessment order and the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). On merits, the order of Ld. CIT(A), the relevant portion of order of Ld. CIT(A) has been referred is to in foregoing paragraph (B) of this order, is found to be just and fair, and in accordance with law, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed on merits.

(C.1) In any case, the appeal of the assessee is not admissible because of failure of the assessee to file concise grounds of appeal in accordance with law as provided in Rule 8 of IT(AT) Rules. For the ease of reference, the rule is reproduced below: -

“Contents of memorandum of appeal. 8. Every memorandum of appeal shall be written in English and shall set forth, concisely and under distinct heads, the grounds of appeal without any argument or narrative; and such grounds shall be numbered consecutively.” (C.2) Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed in limine also.

(C.2.1) In view of the foregoing, paragraphs (C), (C.1) and (C.2) assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

I.T.A. No.193/LKW/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 5 By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the assessee will be (D) at liberty to approach the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in accordance with law, as per Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal), 1963 with the request for restoration of this appeal along with concise grounds consistent with Rule 8 of IT(AT) Rules, if the assessee satisfies Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that there was “sufficient cause” , for non- appearance at the time of hearing on 13.04.2026. (E) In the result, the appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation. (Order pronounced in the open court on 05/05/2026)

Sd/. Sd/. (KUL BHARAT) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Vice President Accountant Member Dated: 05/05/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T.,