MALHOTRA WEIKFIELD FOUNDATION,PUNE vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHIR PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 494 & 437/PUN/2026 Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19

Malhotra Weikfield Foundation, ITO, 3A, 3rd floor Vascon Weikfiled Exemption Ward-1(2), Chambers, Nagar Road Satpal PMT Building, Malhotra Marg, Pune- 411014 V/s Swargate, Pune Maharashtra PAN : AACTM5797L Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : Shri Nilesh Khandalwal.AR Revenue by : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia, JCIT. Sr.DR(Virtual) Date of hearing : 18.05.2026 Date of pronouncement : 21.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate order of NFAC/CIT(A) passed u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

ITA Nos.494 and 437/PUN/2026 Malhotra Weikfield Foundation 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a charitable trust registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The assessee’s trust undertakes charitable activities and the assessee was granted registration u/sec 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee has filed return for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 31.07.2017 disclosing a total income of ₹. NIL. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/sec 143(2) and 142(1) was issued and duly served on the assessee along with questionnaire to substantiate the claims made in the return of income filed. The Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee has not filed the form No. 10B within the time limit under the provisions of the Act and the assessee has filed the submissions explaining the reasons but the AO considering the facts and information dealt on the provisions and submissions in respect of the donations and the corpus funds receipts and assessed the total income of ₹. 37,13,628 and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 21.12.2019. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A),whereas the CIT(A) find that there is a delay of 1904 days in filling the appeal and the assessee has not filed/ explained the sufficient reasonable cause for the delay and the CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee appeal in limine. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has not considered the facts that the assessee has received the A.O order and has filed the appeal before appellate authorities and the delay was not a wanton act but the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Further the Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has good

ITA Nos.494 and 437/PUN/2026 Malhotra Weikfield Foundation case on merits and prayed for an opportunity to substantiate with the material evidences before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no proper compliance by the assesse in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the delay in filling the appeal was not explained with the reasonable cause and the appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for no proper compliance. Whereas the affidavit and application U/sec 249(3) of the Act for condonation of delay of in filling the appeal was not filed before the CIT(A) by the assessee.Hence, we considering the facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity to the assessee to file the application/ affidavit for condonation of delay before the CIT(A) explaining the sufficient and reasonable cause and the CIT(A) should fallow a pragmatic approach for condonation of delay and in accordance with the provisions of law. Accordingly, We set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate the delay condonation and deal the matter afresh in accordance with the law. The assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

ITA Nos.494 and 437/PUN/2026 Malhotra Weikfield Foundation 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 437/PUN/2026 (A.Y.2018-19) 8. As the facts and circumstances in this appeal is identical to ITA No.494/PUN/2026 for the A.Y 2017-18 (except variance in figures) and the decision rendered in above paragraphs would apply mutatis mutandis for this appeal also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the day of 21st May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ंक / Dated : 21st May, 2026 Abhishek mohan आिेश की प्रतितलतप अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. तिभ गीय प्रतितनति, आयकर अपीलीय अतिकरण, “(SMC)” बेंच, 4. पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “(SMC)” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. //True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अतिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.