SCHOOL OF ENGIERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON’BLE & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE
PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JM :
This appeal is directed against order dated 13.10.2025
passed by NFAC [hereinafter referred to as , “Ld. CIT(A)”] u/s 250
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter, referred to as, “Act”]
wherein addition made vide assessment order dated 03.02.2021
was confirmed and appeal was dismissed ex-parte.
2. The facts in brief as culled out from the proceedings of the Ld. Lower Authorities are that the assessee filed return of income for relevant A.Y. 2020-21 on 10.01.2021 declaring NIL Income.
The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny on the issue
“Registration/Approval under various sections of IT Act have not been granted or have been cancelled/withdrawn”. The assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act as the assessee has failed to supply the requisite information with respect to the registration u/s 12A and other details asked for during the assessment proceeding.
2.1 In the assessment order 3 Additions were made and the First
Addition of Rs. 10,787/- was made by refusing benefit of 12A in the absence of filing the proof of valid registration u/s 12A(1)(ab) and, further observing that vide order dated 03.02.2021, the Commissioner
Income
Tax
(Exemption) had rejected the application u/s 12A(1)(ab). The second addition was made of Rs.
1,44,901/- with respect to interest income appearing in Form
26AS of the assessee. The Third Addition was made u/s 69A with respect to the time deposit of Rs. 96,75,000/- in account of assessee maintained in Indian Bank. Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the same ex-parte as assessee allegedly failed to make compliance in pursuance to the notice sent on four dates as mentioned in Para
8.1 of the impugned order.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the Ld. AO has erred in law and in facts in selecting the present case for conducting compulsory scrutiny based on the reason
"related to registration/approval under various sections of the Act, such as 124.35(1)(ii)/(iia)/(iii), 10(23C), etc.:-
Cases where registration/approval under various sections of the Act, such as section 12A,
35(1)(ii)/(iia)/(iii), 10(23C), etc. have not been granted or have been cancelled/withdrawn by the Competent Authority, yet the assessee has been found to be claiming tax exemption/deduction in the return", when registration of the assessee was valid in the subject year.
2. That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on the facts by passing the order under section 143(3) r.w.s.
144B without granting adequate opportunity of being heard and in violation of principles of natural justice. The order is bad in law and without juri iction.
That the Ld, AO has erred in concluding that the appellant is not entitled to benefits available to persons registered under section 12A/12AA, ignoring documents and submissions made during assessment proceedings, more so, when registration of the assessee was valid till 31.03.2021. 4. That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 10,787/- by denying benefit of section 11 and 12 to the assessee and holding that the assessee is not entitled for any benefits available to persons registered u/s 12A of the Act.
That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in making an addition of 21,44,901 as undisclosed interest income of the assessee solely based on entries in Form 26AS.
That the learned Assessing Officer has erred in treating aggregate time deposits of 296,75,000 as unexplained investments u/s 69, without appreciating the source of funds, nature of deposits, and the explanations furnished by the appellant.
That the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly initiated penalty proceedings under sections 270A and 271AAC, as the additions/disallowances themselves are unjustified and not sustainable in law.
That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
We have heard the Ld. AR and the Ld. DR and perused the material placed on record. Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the assessee has placed on record before the Assessing Officer the old registration u/s 12A placed at page 13 of the Paperbook before the completion of the assessment proceedings. It is further fairly admitted that the renewed approval u/s 12A registration dated 14.09.2021 valid from A.Y. 2022-23 to 2026-27 placed at page No. 18 to 20 of the Paperbook could not be placed before the Ld. AO. It is, therefore, submitted that the matter may be restored to the Ld. AO for giving an opportunity to the assessee to present all these documents with respect to the valid approval u/s 12A(1)(ab) and also with respect to other addition made by the Ld. AO. The Ld. DR for the revenueon the other hand, submitted that the assessee has failed to avail the opportunity granted by Ld. CIT(A) who had 5
no option except to pass the order ex-parte and therefore, prayed for dismissing the appeal of the assessee.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record.
The assessee successfully demonstrated before us that the assessee was having a valid
Registration Certificate for the year under consideration and it was registered u/s 12AB since 2002 and further that the renewal of the Registration had been granted vide certificate dated 24.09.2021 for A.Y. 2022-23 to 2026-27. In view of these facts and the documentary evidences brought to our notice, we deem it expedient to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. AO for considering the material evidence which will be submitted or has been submitted before the Ld. AO by the assessee for his consideration. The impugned order for the above reasons is being set-aside. The matter is restored to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer to decide it afresh. The assessee should present its case before the Ld. AO within a period of 60 days from this order.
5. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 20.03.2026
Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS
6