INDRASHIL KAKA BA & KALA BUDH PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 136/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 June 2026AY 2023-245 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was incorrect in dismissing the appeal as infructuous solely because a regular assessment order was passed. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed it to decide the appeal on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an intimation under section 143(1). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as infructuous, stating that a subsequent regular assessment under section 143(3) rendered the earlier appeal non-existent. The assessee argued that both orders confer separate appellate rights.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal against an intimation under section 143(1) becomes infructuous due to a subsequent regular assessment under section 143(3). Whether the CIT(A) is required to pass a speaking order adjudicating the grounds of appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCHES, AHMEDABAD

Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Hearing: 10.06.2026Pronounced: 18.06.2026

PER, T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JM:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 17.11.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ JCIT (Appeals)-2, Vishakhapatnam (in short “Ld. Addl. CIT(A)”) arising out of the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), relating to the Assessment Year 2023-24. I.T.A No. 136/AHD/2026

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:-

1.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT(A)] erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed against the intimation issued under section 143(1) as "infructuous" without adjudicating the specific grounds raised by the Appellant, in violation of the mandatory requirement of a speaking order under section 250(6) of the Act.

1.

1 The Learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in holding that the subsequent 143(3) assessment rendered the appeal against the independent intimation u/s 143(1) non-est, without appreciating that both orders confer separate appellate rights and require independent adjudication on merits.

2.

The Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the basis of the remand report of the Assessing Officer, which is silent on rectification of errors, without application of independent judicial mind and without dealing with the factual and legal submissions placed on record, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

3.

The Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without giving the Appellant opportunity of being heard, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

All of the above Grounds are independent and without prejudice to each other.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete all or any of the Grounds of Appeal before or at the time of hearing.

3.

Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. S N Soparkar appearing for the assessee submitted before us, that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the appeal against the intimation order passed u/s 143(1) dated 23.12.2024 no longer survive and dismissed as infructuous for the sole reason that regular assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 19.03.2025 was passed by the Assessing Officer.

3.1.

Ld. Sr. Counsel brought to our notice to the regular assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, wherein the computation of total income determined by the AO as follows:-

3.2.

Ld. Sr. Counsel further, submitted as against the regular assessment order, assessee preferred further appeal before ld. CIT(A) on 07.04.2025 with acknowledgment No.930445680090425, the same is pending for disposal and therefore, the Ld. Additional CIT(A) is not correct in dismissing the impugned appellate order as not maintenance, just because regular assessment order is passed in assessee’s own case. Therefore, requested to set aside the matter back to the file of Ld. Addl. CIT(A) to decide the matter on merits of the case.

4.

Ld. CIT DR appearing for the Revenue could not dispute the above factual position.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused materials available on record. It is undisputed fact that the assessee filed its return of income on 16.11.2023 wherein claimed gross total income Rs.35,84,59,290/- and amount applied for the objects of the Trust of Rs.31,27,03,412/-. The CPC Centre, Bengaluru sought for clarification of the return of income filed by the assessee Trust and thereafter, passed the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act on 23.12.2024 demanding a tax of Rs.12,72,31,800/-. Against which the assessee Trust filed appeal before Additional CIT/JCIT (Appeal) on 17.01.2025. The assessee also filed rectification application u/s 154 of the Act dated 06.02.2025. It is thereafter, the AO issued 142(1) notice on 12.11.2024, which was replied by the assessee on 23.11.2024. It is thereafter, regular assessment u/s 143(3) was passed on 19.03.2025, wherein, no addition has been made, but retained the addition made u/s 143(1)(a) of Rs.24,50,90,440/-. If the AO has not made the addition as made in section 143(1)(a) of the order, then ld. Addl. CIT(A) is correct in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as infructuous, but it is otherwise, Ld. AO has included the additions made u/s 143(1) of Rs.24.50 crores and no addition made u/s 143(3) of the Act.

6.

Thus, in our considered view, Ld. Addl. CIT(A) is not correct in holding the appeal become infructuous because of the regular assessment order passed by the AO. Therefore, we hereby set aside the appellate order passed by the Addl./JCIT (Appeal) with a direction to give opportunity of hearing to the assessee and dispose of the appeal on merits of the case by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee Trust. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for 7. statistical purposes. Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 18-06-2026. (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 18/06/2026 Mittali आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-

1.

Assessee

2.

Revenue

3.

Concerned CIT

4.

CIT (A)

5.

DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6.

Guard file. By order

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →