JAI SHIVRAI PRATISHTHAN,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1673/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 July 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing the unintentional nature of the delay and the fact that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the case on merits. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a public charitable trust, filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 414 days. The delay was attributed to the demise of their auditor, lack of knowledge of income tax provisions by the trustees, and a delay in being informed about a tax demand after their bank account was attached. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine due to the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned? Whether the matter should be remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 250,Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Amol Khairnar
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Pronounced: 14.07.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER MANISH BORAD, AM:

1.

This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Chandigarh [‘Ld. CIT(A)’] u/s 250 of the Act dated 04.07.2024 which is arising out of the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act for Assessment Year 2020-21 issued on 24.03.2022 by the CPC, Bengaluru.

2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation as there was a delay of 414 days in filing of the appeal.

Following affidavit has been filed :-

“1. Jai Shivrai Pratishthan hereafter referred to as "Appellant" is trust is registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 under Regt. No. F-8461, Pune and also under Societies Registration Act, 7136-93 engaged in the educational activities and established various schools in the Pune and nearby villages.

2.

The Learned AO, CPC-Banglore vide intimation order u/s 143(1) of ITA, 1961 on 24/03/2022 thereby denied the appellant's claim for exemption u/s 11 of ITA, 1961. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred to file an appeal before learned CIT(A), NFAC on 11-06-2023. Following table denotes the computation of delay of 414 days:

Particulars Dates Date of 143(1) Intimation order 24/03/2022 Last date of filing appeal before learned CIT-(A) 22/04/2022 Date of filing appeal 11/06/2023 Delay in filing of appeal 414 Days

3.

Learned CIT(A) vide order passed u/s 250 of ITA, 1961 dated 04-07-2023 rejected the appeal of appellant due to delay of 414 days in filing the said appeal without going into merits of the case Reasons for delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A): 4. Around 2021, auditor of the trust namely Late Prakash Sitaram Dhekane who actively looked after income tax compliances of the appellant trust, unfortunately demised. As such, the burden of the additional responsibilities fell on the "trustees" who had no any knowledge of income tax provisions and compliances. Copy of the death certificate of the Late Prakash Dekhane is attached as Annexure-01.

5.

Around the second week of May 2023, one of the trustees of the appellant trust visited Bank, in order to deposit certain amount in the said bank account of the trust. At that time, the bank officials informed the Trustee that the said bank account had been attached by the Income Tax Officer (Exemption). On being so informed, the Trustees visited the Income Tax Office at Pune and only at that time, they were informed by the Officer that huge tax demand had been raised by the Income Tax Dept. against the appellant trust 6. Due to unfortunate demise of the auditor and due to lack of awareness about e-proceedings of income tax and the undersigned being not much aware of the nitty-gritties of the trust's tax matters, did not realize the factum of passing of the intimation order passed u/s 143(1) of ITA, 1961 for a long time. By that time, delay had already crept in. 7. Considering the above, the trustees approached Tax Counsel from Pune for taking further advice in this matter. However, by that time, the delay had already crept in. Thereafter, the tax consultant filed appeal on 11/06/2023 after delay of 414 days. 8. As the delay in filing the appeal was purely unintentional and does not involve any legal issue or contention, request your goodself to kindly condone the delay and decade the appeal on merits. 9. Further, appellant has time to time submitted the response against hearing notices issued u/s 250 of ITA, 1961. However, learned CIT(A)-NFAC without entering into merits of the case and denied for condonation of the delay. 10. All the above stated facts and details and true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This affidavit is executed on 3rd day of March, 2025” 11.

3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and prayed for remitting back the alleged issues to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication.

4.

Ld. DR did not object the prayer of the assessee.

5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The assessee a public charitable trust, furnished the return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 31.03.2021 and the same processed u/s 143(1)(a) on 24.03.2022 and certain adjustments made resulting into additions in the hands of the assessee. The prima-facie adjustments made by the CPC were challenged before Ld. CIT(A) but with the delay of 414 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated the reasons for the said delay in an affidavit and the same are extracted above (supra) and after carefully going through the same and applying the ratio laid down by the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382 dated 21.03.2025 and by sub- serving the cause of justice, condone the delay in filing of the appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Further, since Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.

Needless to mention here that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the instant appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 14th day of July, 2025.

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →