K.M. & S.K. TRIVEDI CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION 2(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7112/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 October 2026AY 2022-20233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee deserved one more opportunity to present its case. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(E) issued a notice on March 6, 2026, which apparently was not responded to by the assessee. Subsequently, the impugned order was passed without issuing any further notices. Therefore, the Tribunal found it appropriate to set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to decide the same afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The contentions on the merits of the case were left open for the assessee to raise before the Ld. CIT(E). The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, K.M. & S.K. Trivedi Charitable Trust, filed an appeal against an order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Mumbai (Ld. CIT(E)) under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order arose from an assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B. The appeal was filed with a delay, which the Tribunal condoned after finding reasonable cause. The assessee contended that a show cause notice under section 263 was issued on March 6, 2026, but the assessee could not respond, leading to an ex-parte revision order on March 25, 2026. The assessee argued it was not given a reasonable opportunity to represent its case and that the grounds for revision were already verified by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee was provided with a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the Ld. CIT(E) passed the order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that it was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to represent its case before the Ld. CIT(E) because the revision order was passed shortly after the show cause notice was issued, and the assessee could not respond. The assessee also contended that the grounds on which the revision was initiated were already verified by the Assessing Officer, thus lacking a basis for revision. Revenue's Contention: The Learned Departmental Representative (DR) relied on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH; MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE&

Hearing: 13.10.2026Pronounced: 16.10.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH; MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 7112/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2022-23)

K.M. & S.K. Trivedi ITO Exemption 2(1), Mumbai Charitable Trust 6th Floor, Cumballa Hill, MTNL Ground Floor, ICC Chambers - vs. TE Building, Pedder Road, Dr. 1, Saki Vihar Road, Powai, Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai, 400072. Maharashtra, 400026

PAN: AAATK0066E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Satish Mody For Revenue : Smt. Amrita Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 13.10.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16.10.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Mumbai [‘Ld. CIT(E)’], passed u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 25.03.2026, arising out of assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

2.

At the outset, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay in filing this appeal for which the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. After perusing the facts placed on record, we find that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the present appeal

ITA No. 7112/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2022-23 K.M. & S.K. Trivedi Charitable Trust and hence, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication.

3.

During the course of hearing, the ld AR submitted that a show cause u/s 263 dated 06.03.2026 was issued to the assessee, to which the assessee couldn’t respond and thereafter, the revision order u/s 263 has been passed on 25.03.2026 by the ld. CIT(E). It was submitted that the assessee therefore was not allowed reasonable opportunity to represent its matter before the ld. CIT(E), and therefore, an ex-parte order has been passed by the ld. CIT(E). It was further submitted that the grounds on which the ld. CIT(E) has initiated the revision proceedings can be duly rebutted by the assessee and in fact, the same has been duly verified by the Assessing Officer and hence, there is no basis for setting aside the original assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Act.

4.

The ld. DR has been heard, who has relied on other passed by the ld. CIT(E).

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Given the fact that the ld. CIT(E) has issued the notice on 06.03.2026, which apparently has not been responded to by the assessee, and thereafter, without issuing any further notices, the impugned order has been passed by the ld. CIT(E), we find that the assessee deserves one more opportunity and therefore, we deem it appropriate to set aside the matter to the file of ld. CIT(E) to decide the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

6.

The contentions on the merits of the case are left open and the assessee is at liberty to raise all such contentions as so advised before the ld. CIT(E).

ITA No. 7112/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2022-23 K.M. & S.K. Trivedi Charitable Trust 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16.10.2026

Sd/- Sd/- ANIKESH BANERJEE VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

Mumbai, Dated: 16.10.2026 Karishma J. Pawar, SR. PS

Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file

By Order ABHINAV ANANT Digitally signed by ABHINAV ANANT GAVANDE GAVANDE Date: 2026.10.27 12:36:36 +05'30' Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →