THIRUGNANASAMBANDA SWAMIGAL AADHEENAM,MADURAI vs. ITO WARD MADURAI, MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 337/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 October 2026AY 2019-205 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted that the AO had passed an ex-parte order. While acknowledging the assessee's registration under Section 12A and its administrative control by the Government of Tamil Nadu (HR & CE), the Tribunal found merit in the assessee's plea that a change in executive officers led to a lack of awareness regarding the income tax proceedings and the inability to upload requested details. The Tribunal reasoned that the assessee, being a registered charitable trust with statutory audits, would not benefit from non-participation. Therefore, to facilitate the presentation of all relevant facts and explanations regarding the cash and time deposits, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restored the assessment to the file of the AO for a de novo assessment. The assessee was directed to file all relevant documents and written submissions without fail. The AO was instructed to pass an assessment order after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Thirugnanasambanda Swamigal Aadheenam, is a charitable trust registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with registration granted on 09.10.1991. For Assessment Year 2019-20, the assessee did not file a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment upon noticing time deposits and interest earned from bank deposits. The AO made an ex-parte addition of Rs. 1,13,17,823/- under Section 69A for unexplained money, comprising cash deposits of Rs. 1,03,43,520/- and time deposits of Rs. 9,74,303/-, along with interest income of Rs. 4,07,420/-, totaling Rs. 1,17,25,243/-. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC confirmed the AO's action. The assessee contended that due to a change in management and non-linking of PAN with Aadhaar, it failed to respond to notices, leading to the ex-parte order. The assessee sought one more opportunity before the AO.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should grant the assessee an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer, considering the ex-parte assessment order and the assessee's claim of not receiving proper opportunity (mixed question of law and fact). The assessee argued that it did not receive a proper opportunity before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. It attributed this to a change in the Aadheenam's management, a failure to link PAN with Aadhaar, and a lack of knowledge of the Income Tax password, which prevented it from uploading necessary responses. The assessee relied on the Supreme Court decision in TIN Box Co. v. CIT ([2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC)) to seek one more opportunity before the AO to explain the nature and source of deposits. The assessee also highlighted its registration under Section 12A and its administrative control by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, with statutory audits conducted annually. The revenue, through the Learned Departmental Representative (DR), argued against granting the assessee another opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 139,Section 250,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & MS. PADMAVATHY. S

Hearing: 13.08.2026Pronounced: 12.10.2026

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee-AADHEENAM against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 27.11.2025 for AY 2019-20 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act).

ITA 337 /Chny/2026 (AY 2019-20) THIRUGNANASAMBANDA SWAMIGAL AADHEENAM :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee-AADHEENAM is a charitable trust enjoying registration u/s.12A of the Act (issued by Ld. CIT(A) Madurai on 09th October, 1991) whose income was exempt under the Income Tax Act. However, the AO reopened the assessment noticing that assessee didn’t file return of income u/s.139 of the Act, but had time deposits and interest earned from the bank deposits. According to the Ld. AR, the assessee- AADHEENAM came under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department (HRCE) and Guru Maha Saneedhanama. Further, it’s accounts are audited by Government of Tamil Nadu (HR & CE) every year. According to the Ld. AR, due to change of New Aadheenam, it’s PAN wasn’t linked with Aadhaar and not knowing the Income Tax password resulted in non-uploading responses in the Assessment proceedings led to passing of an ex parte order qua assessee making an addition of Rs.1,13,17,823/- u/s.69A (unexplained money) and thus computing total income at Rs.1,17,25,243/-. And by passing the impugned order on 02.01.2024, the Ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO, even though the assessee pleaded and brought to his notice that no proper opportunity was given to the assessee by the AO during the assessment proceedings. But the Ld. CIT(A) ignored the pleas, and confirmed the action of the AO. Hence relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. v. CIT reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC), assessee prayed for one more opportunity before the AO.

3.

Per contra, the Ld. DR does not want us to give one more innings to the assessee.

ITA 337 /Chny/2026 (AY 2019-20) THIRUGNANASAMBANDA SWAMIGAL AADHEENAM :: 3 :: 4. Heard both the parties. Assessee claims to enjoy registration u/s 12A vide certificate issued by Commissioner of Income Tax Madurai dated 9th March, 1991, and hence it claims that its income was exempt under the Income Tax Act. Further, it is claimed that the executive officer of the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Department, supervises the activities of assessee and accordingly, its books of accounts are audited by Government of Tamil Nadu (HR & CE). The AO is noted to have noticed that the assessee had investment in time deposits and earned interest income, but didn’t file return of income. Hence, he reopened the assessment and noticing that the assessee didn’t respond to his notices, added the cash deposits made in Central Bank of India to the tune of Rs.1,03,43,520/-, time deposit in the same bank to the tune of Rs.9,74,303/- added them u/s.69A as Rs.1,13,17,823/- and as well as the interest income Rs.4,07,420/-, thus, total addition was made to the tune of Rs.1,17,25,243/- by passing the assessment order on 02.01.2024. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO by observing that even though the assessee is registered under 12A, it didn’t claim exemption by filing ITR, and that when asked by the Income Tax authority, assessee is bound to prove application of income for charitable purposes and is bound to produce the books of accounts, vouchers or reconciliation between bank deposit and income, which in this case, assessee failed to produce. Thus, according to Ld CIT(A), assessee has failed to discharge its burden to prove the cash deposits/time deposits in the bank, hence, addition made by AO was justified and he confirmed it.

ITA 337 /Chny/2026 (AY 2019-20) THIRUGNANASAMBANDA SWAMIGAL AADHEENAM :: 4 :: 5. Aggrieved the assessee is before us pleading that assessee didn’t get proper opportunity before the Assessing Officer during the assessment stage and he prayed for one more opportunity before the AO by relying on the decision of the of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. (supra) and undertakes to explain and place all relevant documents before AO to prove the nature and source of the cash/time deposit in the bank. In this regard, it is noted that AO has passed an ex parte order qua the assessee. The assessee claims to be under the administrative/supervisory control of Government of Tamil Nadu (HR & CE) and due to change of executive officers, (due to transfer/new appointment) assessee was in the dark about the present income tax proceedings and therefore, could not upload the necessary details called for by the AO. Be that as it may, assessee is noted to be enjoying registration u/s.12A of the Act and claims to be under the administrative/supervisory control of the Government of Tamil Nadu (HR & CE) and Guru Maha Saneedhanama. The assessee claims to be maintaining its books and every year, its books are statutorily audited by the Government of Tamil Nadu. In such a scenario, assessee doesn’t gain by not participating before the income tax authorities and hence we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to assessee to facilitate placing all the relevant facts before the AO and explain the nature and source of the cash/time deposit in the bank. Hence, we set aside the impugned order of

ITA 337 /Chny/2026 (AY 2019-20) THIRUGNANASAMBANDA SWAMIGAL AADHEENAM :: 5 :: the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the assessment back to the file of AO for de nova assessment. The assessee is directed to file all the relevant documents as undertaken before us, without making any excuses and file written submission and produce the relevant details as called for by the AO without fail. AO to pass assessment order after hearing the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on the 12th day of October 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/-

(प�ावती .एस) (एबी टी. वक�) (PADMAVATHY. S) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 12th October, 2026. YS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF YASHVIR Digitally signed by YASHVIR SINGH SINGH Date: 2026.10.16 15:16:44 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →