MAHARASHTRA MARITIME BOARD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - EXEM. CIRCLE 2, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Id. AO in holding appellant is a 'state' under Article 289 of the Constitution of India and therefore, not liable to tax under Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Id. AO in holding that the appellant is not entitled to claim exemption under section 11 of the act, for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise.

On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the ld. AO in adding a sum of Rs.4,57,30,788/-being TDS and Rs.17,59,75,000/- being Tax Payments while computing the total income of the appellant, for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise.

The Appellant craves leaves to alter, amend, withdraw or substitute any ground or grounds or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust is formed by Government of Maharashtra for establishing maritime and administer and develop minor ports on the coastal line which was engaged in developing ports and infrastructure. The assessee trust had filed its return of income for the year under consideration dated 10.02.2022 declaring total income at Rs.Nil after claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The assessee’s case was selected for complete scrutiny for the reason large receipts reported by trust for “charitable purpose”. Notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were duly issued and served upon the assessee. After duly considering the assessee’s submission the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO” for short) passed the assessment order dated 22.12.2022 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act determining total income at Rs.72,26,38,803/- after making an addition/disallowance of the said amount u/s ITA Nos.8936, 8937 & 8938/Mum/2025 M/s. Maharashtra Maritime Board

Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority who vide order dated 24.10.2025 upheld the disallowance made by the Ld. AO.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us, challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the abovementioned grounds.

During the appellate proceeding the Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR” for short) for the assessee submitted that the co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s case for earlier years has remanded the issue back to the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on the same issue pertaining to earlier assessment years starting from 2003-04 and since the finding in those matters would have a bearing on the present issue in hand the Ld. AR prayed that these appeals may also be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The Ld. AR further stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate the additional ground raised by the assessee claiming immunity from taxation as per Article 289 of the Constitution of India on the merits rather had merely denied the same stating that the assessee has not claimed this in the earlier assessment year starting from A.Y. 2003-04 to 2018-19 and thereby rejecting the assessee’s contention without getting into the merits of the claim.

The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR” for short), on the other hand, vehemently opposed to setting aside the issue back to the Ld. CIT(A) for the reason that in ITA Nos.8936, 8937 & 8938/Mum/2025 M/s. Maharashtra Maritime Board the earlier years’ appeal the Ld. CIT(A)’s order was ex-parte whereas in the present assessment year it is not the case. The Ld. DR relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the assessee has raised various grounds before the Ld. CIT(A) pertaining to the denial of exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act along with an additional ground claiming the assessee to be a “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India basis which the assessee will be exempted from union taxation under Article 289 of the Constitution of India. This issue has not been dealt with extensively by the Ld. CIT(A) which again is a pertinent issue to decide whether or not the assessee can claim exemption u/s 11 of the Act and is immune from taxation. Further, even on the issue of the merits of the case there has been no detail analysis on the issue raised by the assessee and since the earlier years have already been set aside to the Ld. CIT(A) which finding would also have a bearing on the present issue in hand, we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on the merits and in accordance with law to be decided along with the earlier assessment years’ appeals for the sake of consistency as the issue is common for all the years. The assessee is directed to strictly comply with the proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A) without any undue delay from its side.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose. 11. The finding given in this appeal will apply mutatis mutandis to other appeals in ITA Nos.8937 & 8938/Mum/2025 as well and hence the same are also hereby allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.03.2026 (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER

The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT- concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER,