SWAJAN FOUNDATION,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

ITA 790/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 September 2026AY 2019-206 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Swajan Foundation, failed to file its return of income for Assessment Year 2019-20. The Income Tax Department, possessing information about transactions, initiated proceedings under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, leading to an order under Section 148A(d) holding that income had escaped assessment. A notice under Section 148 was issued, but the assessee did not respond. Despite further statutory notices from the Assessing Officer (AO) and information from the GST portal indicating the assessee was a service provider filing GST returns, the assessee provided no submissions or evidence to prove its status as a cooperative society or the principle of mutuality. The AO treated the assessee as a business entity, estimated profit at 8% on transactions of Rs. 4,50,37,072/-, and added Rs. 23,796/- as interest income. The assessment was completed under Section 147 read with Sections 144/144B at Rs. 36,26,761/-. Penalty proceedings were also initiated. The assessee's appeal to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, was dismissed in limine for non-compliance.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 159 days in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation regarding technical difficulties in filing on the Income Tax Portal. The Tribunal noted that the AO's order was ex-parte and the NFAC had dismissed the appeal in limine due to non-compliance before the first appellate authority. Considering the facts, the Tribunal was of the view that the assessee deserved another opportunity to present its case. Consequently, the order of the NFAC was set aside, and the file was restored to the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO was directed to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to present its case. The assessee was cautioned to fully comply with the AO's directions in the set-aside proceedings, failing which the AO would be at liberty to pass an order based on available material, even if ex-parte. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned appellate order ex parte and sustaining the ex parte assessment framed under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without granting a proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant, thereby violating the principles of natural justice? - Assessee's contention: The CIT(A) passed an ex parte order and sustained an ex parte assessment without providing a proper opportunity to be heard, violating natural justice principles. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded. 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs.36,02,965/- by treating the appellant trust as a business entity and estimating income at 8% of gross transactions of Rs.4,50,37,072/- on a presumptive basis, without any incriminating material or basis on record, and without appreciating that the appellant is a charitable institution registered under section 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, engaged in non-profit activities? - Assessee's contention: The addition of Rs.36,02,965/- is erroneous as the assessee is a charitable institution registered under Sections 12A and 80G, engaged in non-profit activities, and the estimation was made without incriminating material. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded. 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of interest income of Rs.23,796/- without appreciating that the said interest was incidental to the charitable activities of the trust which is registered u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961? - Assessee's contention: The addition of Rs.23,796/- interest income is incorrect as it is incidental to the trust's charitable activities and the trust is registered u/s 12A. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded. 4. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the assessment order despite the fact that the Assessing Officer failed to properly appreciate the nature of activities of the appellant trust and ignored the trust deed, past records, and other details already available on the Income Tax Department portal? - Assessee's contention: The AO failed to appreciate the trust's activities and ignored the trust deed, past records, and available portal details, leading to an erroneous assessment order upheld by the CIT(A). - Revenue's contention: Not recorded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(d),Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 270A,Section 271A,Section 271B,Section 12A,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Respondent: Shri Suidhakar Shukla, D.R

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 26.11.2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. The Income Tax Department was in possession of information that, during the year under consideration, the assessee had undertaken certain transactions and, in this regard, an opportunity was given to the assessee as per provisions of section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act’) and, subsequently, an order under section 148A(d) of the Act was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) holding the transactions

ITA No.790/LKW/2026 undertaken by the

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 148A

All 3,491 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →