GURUKUL SHIKSHA SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD - 3, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

ITA 549/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 October 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's first contention of bonafide belief was without merit. However, regarding the second contention, the Tribunal found merit in the argument that the penalty under Section 272A(2)(e) should be computed only up to the last date prescribed under Section 139(4) of the Act, and not until the date of filing the return in response to a notice under Section 148. The Tribunal reasoned that the obligation to furnish a return under Section 139(4A) can only be discharged within the period prescribed under Section 139(4). Once this period expires, the assessee is no longer empowered to voluntarily furnish a valid return. Therefore, the default cannot be considered continuing indefinitely, as it becomes incapable of voluntary compliance. The Tribunal followed the decisions of the Coordinate Benches in Swamy Vivekanandha Vidhyala Trust vs. ITO (Exemption) and Bethany Seva Sangam. Accordingly, the penalty was re-computed from 01.11.2015 to 31.03.2016 (the last date for filing a belated return) at Rs. 15,200/-, deleting the remaining amount of Rs. 2,71,400/-. The issue of penalty computation was thus decided in favour of the assessee, albeit with a reduced penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Gurukul Shiksha Sanstha, an educational institution, filed an appeal against the penalty order dated 22.07.2024, which was upheld by the CIT(A) on 30.03.2026. The penalty of Rs. 2,86,600/- was levied under Section 272A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2015-16, due to a delay in filing the income tax return. The assessee, registered under Section 12A and claiming exemption under Section 10(23C), had not filed its return in the past, believing it was not required due to its exempt income. The return was eventually filed on 05.09.2023, in response to a notice under Section 148 of the Act. No additions were made to the income during the assessment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the penalty under Section 272A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for delay in filing the income tax return, can be levied for the period from the due date of filing the return to the date of filing the return in response to a notice under Section 148 of the Act, or if it should be restricted to the period until the last date available for filing a belated return under Section 139(4) of the Act. Assessee's Contentions: - The assessee argued that it was under a bonafide belief that it was not required to file a return due to its exempt income, and therefore, no penalty is leviable in light of Section 273B of the Act. - Alternatively, the assessee contended, relying on the decision in Swamy Vivekanandha Vidhyala Trust vs. ITO (Exemption), ITA No. 2108/CHNY/2026, that the penalty should be restricted only for the period from the due date of filing the return to the last day by which a belated return could be filed. Revenue's Contentions: - The Revenue supported the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. DR contended that the default continued till the return was actually filed in response to the notice under Section 148, and therefore, the penalty was rightly computed for the entire period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(2)(e),Section 250,Section 10(23C),Section 12A,Section 273B,Section 148,Section 139(4A),Section 139(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE SMC BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CA
Hearing: 12/10/2026Pronounced: 14/10/2026

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi (for short, “CIT(A)”) dated 30.03.2026 passed u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of penalty order dated 22.07.2024 passed u/sec. 272A(2)(e) of the Act for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015-16. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is against the penalty levied u/sec. 272A(2)(e) of the Act at Rs. 2,86,600/- levied for delay in filing the income tax return.

3.

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is an educational institution located in Chandrapur, Maharashtra and the income earned is exempt u/sec. 10(23C) of the Act and that the assessee has also been registered u/sec. 12A of the A

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 272A(2)(e)

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(e) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →