SHARMA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(3) EXEMPTION , MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 636/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2025AY 2022-23Bench: himself by stating that the grounds do not present coherent, substantiated or arguable points of law or fact."4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A). The assessee was directed to file modified grounds of appeal and a detailed note narrating the applicable facts, and the CIT(A) was instructed to adjudicate the grounds afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

Sharma Shikshan Sanstha, a charitable institution, filed its income tax return for AY 2022-23 claiming exemption under Section 11, which was denied via an Intimation Order issued under Section 143(1). The assessee's subsequent appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed on the grounds of improperly drafted grounds of appeal, with liberty granted to file a fresh appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal without adjudicating on merits due to improperly drafted grounds of appeal, and the denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

order : 22.05.2025 O R D E R [ Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 29/11/2024, passed by the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Mysore [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], whereby the Learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the Assessee against the Intimation Order, dated 31/03/2023, passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year 2022-2023. The appeal is within limitation since the order impugned was passed on 29/11/2024 [incorrectly mentioned as 29/11/2023 in appeal Memorandum].

2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

1.

1. The Learned Addl/JCIT (Appeals), Mysore has erred in Assessment Year 2022-2023 law and on facts and circumstances of the case in upholding the addition of Rs.60,97,185 in denying various exemptions claimed under the provisions of section 11, by stating that the grounds of appeal as stated in the appeal are not properly drafted or narrated.

2.

The Learned Addl/JCIT (Appeals), Mysore did not appreciated the facts and documents placed before himself by stating that the grounds do not present coherent, substantiated or arguable points of law or fact.”

3.

The Assessee is a charitable institution engaged in spreading education by running schools in Mumbai. For the Assessment Year 2022-2023 the Assessee filed return of income on 18/12/2022 declaring income of INR.250/- after claiming exemption of INR.60,97,185/- under Section 11 of the Act. The aforesaid return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and the exemption claimed by the Assessee under Section 11 of the Act was denied vide Intimation Order, dated 31/03/2023. The appeal preferred by the Assessee before CIT(A) challenging the same was dismissed vide order, dated 29/11/2024. Therefore, the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 2 above.

4.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing the Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee submitted that the Learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without adjudicating upon the merits and completely knowing various documents/details filed during the appellate proceeding.

5.

Per contra Learned Departmental Representative, placing reliance upon Paragraph 7 of the order impugned, submitted that the CIT(A) had specifically recorded that the grounds raised

by the Assessee were not proper, there were discrepancies in the facts stated and 2. Assessment Year 2022-2023 the same did not articulate the factual or legal basis on which the appeal was filed. Thus, the Learned Departmental Representative supported the order passed by the CIT(A).

6.

On perusal of the order impugned we find that the Learned CIT(A) has concluded as under:

8. In view of the above discrepancies and considering the fact of the case, the appellant’s appeal for AY 2022-23 is dismissed in its entirety on account of the improper narration of the facts in grounds of appeal with liberty to file afresh appeal with proper narration of facts of the case and grounds of appeal.

7.

From the above it can be seen that the Learned CIT(A) had, while dismissing the appeal, granted liberty to the Assessee to file fresh appeal with proper narration of facts and grounds of appeal

. Instead of filing the fresh appeal, the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, in order to meet ends of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated, 29/11/2024 passed by the CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to the Assessee to file modified grounds of appeal and a detailed note narrating the applicable facts. The CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the grounds/modified grounds raised by the Assessee afresh as per law after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Assessee is directed to file submissions along with supporting documents before the CIT(A) on receipt of notice of hearing. The Assessee is directed to be vigilant and track the proceedings through Income Tax Business Application Portal. It is clarified that in case the Assessee fails to act as per the aforesaid directions and/or fails to appear before the CIT(A) or fails of file details/documents/submissions before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) would be at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the appeal based upon material on record. Accordingly, Ground No.1 and 2 raised by the Assessee are allowed

3. Assessment Year 2022-2023 for statistical purposes.

8. In result, in terms of Paragraph 7 above, the appeal preferred by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →