DHARMBHASKAR RASHTRASANT SHRIPACHLEGAVKAR MAHARJ PRATISHTAN,PUNE vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2736/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 June 2025AY 2011-1210 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 12A(2) of the Act, particularly the proviso, should be interpreted liberally to give effect to the legislative intent of preventing genuine hardship. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was granted registration under Section 12AA on 02.12.2016, and the impugned orders were passed subsequently. While the proviso requires the objects and activities of the trust to remain the same for the preceding assessment years, the lower authorities had not examined this aspect. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of the AO for a fresh re-examination. The AO is directed to specifically consider the objects and nature of activities of the assessee in AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 and allow the claim as per facts and law, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee is also directed to file relevant documentary evidence. The common grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dharmbhaskar Rashtrasant Shripachlegavkar Maharj Pratishtan, a trust, filed appeals for Assessment Years (AYs) 2011-12 and 2012-13. The Assessing Officer (AO) initially treated donations of Rs. 34,92,076/- for AY 2011-12 and a surplus of Rs. 2,93,770/- for AY 2012-13 as taxable income. The appeals reached the ITAT, which remanded the matter to the AO to consider the assessee's registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO, however, again denied exemption under Sections 11 and 12, stating registration was granted on 02.12.2016, after the relevant assessment years. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the AO's order. The assessee is now before the ITAT for the second round of appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee, a trust, is eligible for claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13, despite not having registration under Section 12AA at the time of assessment, given subsequent registration and pending proceedings. Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the proviso to Section 12A(2) of the Act allows trusts with pending assessment proceedings to claim exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 upon subsequent registration. They relied on the ITAT's previous directions and the amendment to Section 12A by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014, which they contend applies retrospectively to pending proceedings. They cited the case of Sree Sree Ramkrishna Samity Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Revenue's contention: The Revenue did not controvert the findings of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal's previous order. The AO and CIT(A) held that the proviso to Section 12A(2) is applicable only when assessment proceedings are pending before the AO on the date of registration, and pendency of an appeal before the CIT(A) does not qualify. They also noted that the registration certificate dated 02.12.2016 indicated registration from FY 2016-17 onwards.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12,Section 12A,Section 12A(2),Section 12AA,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 254,Section 2(24)(ii-a),Section 11(1)(d),Section 57,Section 57(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Shastri & Jasraj Sutar
For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : Two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the two separate order(s) both dated 05.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)"] pertaining to Assessment Years ("AYs”) 2011-12 and 2012-13. Since the issue(s) involved in both the appeals are identical, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2.

This is the second round of appeal before the Tribunal. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →