KUMBHARWADA WELFARE CENTRE,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and the uploading of Form 10B, holding that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause due to technical glitches beyond their control. The claim for exemption of income under Section 11 of the Act was allowed.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a Public Charitable Trust, filed its return of income but faced a delay of 137 days in uploading the audit report (Form 10B) due to technical glitches on the income tax portal. The delay in filing the appeal itself was 10 days, attributed to the Chartered Accountant's hospitalization.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in uploading Form 10B due to technical glitches constitutes a sufficient cause for condonation and entitlement to exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 154,Section 143(1)(a),Section 12AA,Section 11
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN
Date of Hearing 29.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 26.09.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2022-23.
At the very outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the present appeal before me. In this regard, Ld. AR has taken my attention to the application 2 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai for seeking condonation of delay, whereas, it is submitted that during the period of preparation of appeal, the chartered accountant (CA) of the assessee was admitted to hospital for cardiac arrest and therefore he was advised complete one month bed rest and in this regard the assessee has also filed supporting affidavit and the documents of admission of the chartered accountant in the hospital.
On the other hand LD DR has not filed any counter affidavit to controvert the contents of the application for seeking condonation of delay.
4. Therefore, considering the contents of the application and taking into account the illness of the chartered accountant and other medical documents supported by affidavit. I am of the view that assessee has sufficient cause for seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. Therefore the delay in filing the present appeal stands condoned. The appeal is admitted to be heard on merits.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order u/s 250 passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of 3 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai Income tax (Appeals) is bad in Law and against the principle of natural justice therefore needs to be quashed.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in confirming the rejection of application U/s 154 without providing any opportunity of hearing by the learned Deputy Director of Income tax, C.P.C., Bangalore.
3 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in arbitrarily confirming the Ld. learned Deputy Director of Income tax, C.P.C., Bangalore action in not rectifying the mistake as adjustments were made beyond the A.O. jurisdiction/ powers provided under clause (i) to (vi) of section 143(1)(a) not allowing exemption of income for application of income of Rs. 11,65,496/-.
The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the facts that the appellant trust could not upload Form-10B online before due date due to technical issues and glitches on the income tax portal but all the required data such as incomes, expenditures and auditors' details and 12AA registration details were filed / furnished in the Income Tax Return and the audit was also obtained timely. These evidences were also produced along with form 35 which have been listed in CIT order.
5. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the facts that the learned Deputy Director of Income tax, C.P.C., Bangalore was not justified in disagreeing with response submitted while processing income tax return u/s143(1) (a) of income tax Act 1961 by not allowing exemption of income for application of income of Rs. 11,65,496/-.
The basic ground in the present appeal is with regard to challenging the action of the revenue authorities disallowing the exemption of income, on account of the fact that form 10B could not be uploaded within the prescribed time.
4 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai
In this regard, for adjudicating, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, I have heard the counsel for both the parties and have gone through the documents placed on record, judgements cited before me and also the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
From the records, I noticed that the assessee is a Public Charitable Trust registered under section 12 AA of the income tax Act. The object of the trust is to provide educational aid, medical relief and relief of poverty. The assessee trust filed its return of income on 1/10/2022 by filing details of audit like date of submission of audit report dated 3/09/2022 by generating UDIN dated 3/09/2022. It was submitted that due to frequent changes in software glitches the error of uploading audit report form 10B on income tax portal had happened. Although the audit report form 10B was signed with UDIN dated 3/09/2022 and thereafter income tax return was also filed on 1/10/2022 within due date. But the audit report form 10B could not be uploaded by the assessee on the portal within due date because of software glitches as it was showing technical error. It is pertinent to mention here that the date of signing of form 10B is 3/09/2022 and in this way, there was delay of 137 days in uploading audit report on the portal. However, because of this delay, 5 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai the total income was calculated without allowing exemption of income.
It would not be out of place to mention here that assessee had received email on 28/01/2025 that he can apply for condonation of delay in uploading audit report to jurisdictional Commissioner of Income-tax exemption, which also goes to show that there was indeed technical glitches in the software. I have gone through the CBDT circular number 16/2024 dated 18/11/2024 where in powers for condonation of delay in uploading form 10B has been delegated to the respective officers of the department. This fact alone makes it clear that there were technical glitches and the assessee was prevented with the ‘sufficient cause’ for not filing the requisite form within time. Thus, in my view the reason for not filing form 10B was beyond the control of the assessee. Since these type of difficulties were being faced by different applicants. Therefore, CBDT vide their circular had delegated the powers for condoning the delay.
I have also considered and gone through the decisions relied upon by the assessee. In the case of Shri Swami Vivekananda trust Vs DCIT, Bangalore decided on 12 July 2023 and the Dushkal Go Sewa Samiti versus ITO (E), Jodhpur decided on 06/10/2023. And 6 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai considering the fact that assessee had already submitted documentary evidences from serial number 1 to 9 of the paper book in support of his grounds. I am of the considered view that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not uploading signed audit report, form 10B because of software glitches. Therefore, I direct to condone the delay of 137 delays in uploading audit report on the portal and to allow the claim of exemption of income under section 11 of the Act for application of income of the assessee, if otherwise found entitled.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.02.2025. (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 18/02/2025 KRK, PS 7 Kumbharwada Welfare Centre, Mumbai आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant 1. ""थ" / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयु"(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु"बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"ािपत "ित ////
उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst.
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026