KESHAV BAL VIKAS SAMITI,DATIA vs. COMMISSIOMNER APPEAL, NFAC DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 533/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 October 2026AY 2018-20196 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) was rejected by the lower authorities primarily because the assessee could not conclusively prove that the cash deposits were indeed student fees received during the year. The Tribunal acknowledged that the annual gross receipts were below Rs. 1 crore. In the interest of justice, and considering the assessee's request to produce evidence, the Tribunal decided to afford the assessee an opportunity to prove the nature of the cash deposits. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to consider the fresh evidence to be produced by the assessee. The Assessing Officer was directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Keshav Bal Vikas Samiti, a trust running Saraswati Sishu/Vidhya Mandir school, did not file an Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2018-19. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, stating total receipts were less than Rs. 1 crore. The Revenue received information about cash deposits totaling Rs. 59,94,523/- (Rs. 25,62,203/- in Axis Bank and Rs. 34,32,320/- in Bank of India). A notice under Section 148 was issued. The Assessing Officer, not satisfied with the explanation that these were student fees, added the entire amount as unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition. The assessee appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of cash deposits totaling Rs. 59,94,523/- in the assessee's bank accounts, ignoring the claim that these were student fee receipts exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the cash deposits represented student fees, and since the total gross receipts were below Rs. 1 crore, they were exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiad). The assessee also contended that the CIT(A) confirmed the addition without affording sufficient opportunity for hearing and requested an opportunity to produce evidence. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through the learned Senior DR, supported the impugned order passed by the CIT(A). No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Vivek K Jain, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 26.10.2026Pronounced: 26.10.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (DB) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 533/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Keshav Bal Vikas Samiti, V Commissioner Appeal/ H No. 600 Kishori Sharan ITO (E) Ward, Chauda Ka Bada, Gwalior- Aayakar Bhawan, 475661 City Centre, Gwalior- 475661 PAN: AAATK7387A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vivek K Jain, CA. Department by Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr (DR) Date of hearing 26.10.2026 Date of pronouncement 26.10.2026 ORDER PER:SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, J.M.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 23.04.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2017-18/10236313 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ NFAC(Delhi) [(hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2018-19, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal.

ITA No.533/Agr/2026

2(i). The facts in brief are that assessee is a trust and runs school Saraswati Sishu/Vidhya Mandir Bundela Nagar, Datia. Assessee did not file ITR for A.Y. 2018-19, claiming that the school receipts are exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) as the total receipts were less than 1 crore. Department had an information that assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 25,62,203/- in the bank account no. 911010046188670 of Axis Bank and Rs. 34,32,320/- in the savings account no. 906710210000001 with Bank of India. After obtaining prior approval from the competent authority, notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 26.03.2022 was issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee did not filed return in response thereof. Statutory notices u/s 142(1) and show cause notice u/s 144 of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. (ii). Assessee, vide reply dated 16.01.2023 and 31.01.2023 submitted its bank statement, fee receipt, auditor’s report and balance sheet, stating that the gross receipts of assessee trust were below one crore and the school fee receipts were exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Assessee further submitted that the objective of the assessee trust is 100% solely for educational purposes only and not for profit making. The gross receipts as per audited balance sheet and income and

2 | P a g e

ITA No.533/Agr/2026

expenditure accounts were Rs. 60,77,964/- out of which the students fees amounts/ cash deposited in assessee’s Axis Bank account amounting to Rs. 25,62,203/- and assessee’s Bank of India account amounting to Rs. 34,32,320/- were exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The assessing officer was, however, not satisfied and observed that in the bank statement, the description is mentioned as “By cash Saraswati Vidya Mandir”. The Assessing Officer, not being satisfied with the nature and source of cash deposits further observed that the details for which the cash transaction were made could not be ascertained, hence added Rs. 59,94,523/- in the total income of the assessee as unexplained cash deposits, vide assessment order dated 17.03.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before ld CIT(A) against the said assessment order, ld CIT(A) observed that the appellant has failed to satisfactorily explain the nature and source of cash deposit, hence confirmed the additions made by the assessing officer for want of necessary evidence. 4. Appellant assessee has preferred this second appeal on the following ground: “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing officer has erred in disallowing appellants claim of exemption

3 | P a g e

ITA No.533/Agr/2026

under section 10(23C) (iiiad) of the Income Tax Act and assessed the income of Rs. 59,94,523/-. The detail breakup of Income assessed is as under Rs. 25,62,203.00 addition on account of cash deposit in Axis bank account no. 911010046188670 Rs. 34,32,320.00 addition on account of cash deposit in Bank of India Account No 906710210000001” 5. Perused the records. Heard ld representative for the appellant assessee and ld Sr (DR) for the respondent revenue. 6. The main point on the basis of the ground raised under appeal is as to whether ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of cash deposit of Rs. 59,94,523/- in assessee’s bank accounts, ignoring the fact that the same was students fee receipts of the assessee trust and were exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act? 7. Ld AR has submitted that the assessee trust is entitled for the exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act in respect of the impugned cash deposit which was part of fee received from the students in cash by the assessee trust and was less than one crore, hence was entitled for the exemption. Ld CIT(A) has ignored this fact and has confirmed the said addition without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld AR submitted that if an opportunity is afforded to the assessee, he will prove by the evidence that the said cash receipts are the school fee of the trust. Prayed to allow appeal. 8. Ld Sr DR has supported the impugned order.

4 | P a g e

ITA No.533/Agr/2026

9.

During the course of hearing, ld AR has requested to afford assessee an opportunity to produce evidence to prove that the impugned cash deposits in assessee’s bank accounts are the students fee receipts of the assessee trust for the year under consideration. We note that the annual gross receipts are below one crore. The assessee’s claim has been rejected merely because the assessee could not prove that the said cash receipts deposited in assessee’s aforesaid two bank accounts were in fact the students fee received during the year under consideration. In such a fact situation and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to afford assessee an opportunity to prove the said cash deposits in its two bank accounts as school fees received from the students during the year under consideration. The matter is accordingly remitted back to the file of ld Assessing Officer before whom the assessee shall produce the required evidence. The ld Assessing Officer is directed to consider assessee’s fresh evidence to prove the said cash deposits as students fee received during the year under consideration by the assessee trust and shall pass order a fresh in accordance with law. Needles to say that the assessing officer shall ensure the substantial compliance of the

5 | P a g e

ITA No.533/Agr/2026

principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on- 26.10.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 27.10.2026 *Aamir, PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

6 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →