P D MEMORIAL RELIGIOUS AND EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION,,BAHADURGARH vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH

ITA 932/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 September 2026AY 2021-225 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

This appeal by the assessee, P D Memorial Religious And Educational Association, is against the order of the Ld. Addl/Jt. CIT(A), Aurangabad, dated 28/03/2024, for Assessment Year 2021-22. The appeal was filed 417 days late. The assessee cited FIRs against the society's Chairman and members as the reason for the delay, but the Tribunal found this insufficient to explain such a long delay. The delay was condoned subject to a cost of Rs. 20,000 to the PM National Relief Fund. The assessee filed its return of income on 31/03/2022, claiming it was filed under section 139(4). No forms were uploaded with the return, leading to the rejection of its claim for exemption under sections 11/12 read with section 12A. The assessee did not file a reply to the notice issued by the Ld. Addl/Jt. CIT(A), resulting in an ex-parte order.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 417 days in filing the appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 20,000 to the PM National Relief Fund. Regarding the substantive grounds, the Tribunal, respectfully following the coordinate bench's decision in ITA No. 3784/Del/2024, held that the delay in filing Form 10B online was a curable defect. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the audit report. It was also held that the assessee did file the return of income within the time limit prescribed for a belated return. Since these aspects were not considered by the Ld. Addl/Jt. CIT(A) due to the assessee's non-compliance before him, the matter was restored to the file of the Ld. Addl/Jt. CIT(A). The Ld. Addl/Jt. CIT(A) was directed to decide the issue afresh after taking into consideration the audit report filed in Form 10B as valid, given the condonation of delay. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad in law and on facts? (Mixed law and fact) 2. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not providing a proper opportunity of being heard? (Mixed law and fact) 3. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the action of the CPC in recomputing the returned income without giving any intimation/deficiency under section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Mixed law and fact, turns on Section 139(9)) 4. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the action of the CPC of not allowing the benefit of section 11 read with section 12A of the Act? (Mixed law and fact, turns on Sections 11 and 12A) 5. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not allowing revenue expenditure of Rs. 3,32,59,776/- as application of income? (Mixed law and fact) 6. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not allowing revenue expenditure of Rs. 3,32,59,776/- while disallowing the benefits of section 11? (Mixed law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the audit report in Form 10B was filed on 23/03/2023, which was after the intimation under section 143(1) but before the appellate order. They relied on CBDT Circular No. 17/2021, which extended the due date for filing belated/revised returns for AY 2021-22 to 31/03/2022, asserting the return was filed within the due date specified under section 139(4). The assessee also relied on a CBDT clarification dated 23/04/2019 and a coordinate bench decision in ITA No. 3784/Del/2024, which held that delay in filing Form 10B is a curable defect and exemption under section 11 should not be denied. They contended that the requirement is for filing under section 139, not specifically 139(1), and section 12A(1)(ba) allows filing under section 139(4) within the time allowed under section 139(1) or 139(4). Revenue's contentions: No specific contentions were recorded for the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(9),Section 11,Section 12A,Section 139(4),Section 143(1),Section 139(1),Section 12A(1)(ba)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी िवजय वमा" , लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 932 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 P D Memorial Religious And बनाम The DCIT(Exemption) Educational Association Circle-2,Chandigarh Sarai Aurangabad, Bahadurgarh, Jhajjar-124507, Haryana "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATP3857G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Niraj Jain, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Pr. CIT, DR(Virtual Mode) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09/09/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/09/2026

आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A), Aurangabad dt. 28/03/2024, for the Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. At the outset the Registry has pointed out that the present appeal is barred by limitation by 417 days for which the condonation application has been filed for seeking condonation.

3.

In the condonation application the assessee has claimed that th

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 139(9)

All 229 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(9) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →