RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 10B was due to reasonable causes like the search operation and COVID-19 pandemic, and that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on technical grounds. The penalty under Section 271D was also examined in light of the amended provisions of Section 269SS.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an educational society, failed to file its audit report in Form 10B within the prescribed time for AY 2019-2020. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, upholding the denial of exemption and treating gross receipts as income. The penalty under Section 271D for AY 2017-2018 was also in question.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the audit report (Form 10B) can be condoned due to reasonable cause, and whether the penalty under Section 271D is leviable for cash receipts in a completed immovable property transaction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(1),Section 11,Section 12,Section 271D,Section 269SS,Section 269T,Section 271E
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide 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.
- 441 ITR 722162 citing441 ITR 722 · 2022 · SC
- CIT v. Hissaria Bros.132 citing291 ITR 244 · 2007 · HC
- CIT v. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills110 citing379 ITR 521 · 2015 · SC
- Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT18 citing167 Taxmann.com 352 · 2024 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘B’Bench, Hyderabad
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G.
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :
These four appeals by the Assessee are directed against the four separate Orders of the learned CIT(A). The appeals in ITA Nos.972 and 973/Hyd/2024 are directed against the two separate Orders both dated 27.08.2024 of the learned CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad arising from the processing of the return of income u/sec.143(1) of the Income Tax Act [in short "the Act"], 1961 for the assessment years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, respectively. The appeals ITA.No.1300
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.
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.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Ravi Rishi Educational Society, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle-2(4), HyderabadHyderabad18 Feb 2026Remanded
Also relies on Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 10B/10BB was due to reasonable causes like the COVID-19 pandemic and search operations. It also noted that the assessee had applied its entire receipts for charitable purpo...
- Ravi Rishi Educational Society, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle-2(4), HyderabadHyderabad18 Feb 2026Remanded
Also relies on Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the non-recording of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271D makes the penalty order invalid. It also noted that consideration received against t...
- Ravi Rishi Educational Society, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle 2(4), HyderabadHyderabad18 Feb 2026Remanded
Also relies on Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the audit report was due to reasonable causes like the COVID-19 pandemic and search operations. It also noted that the assessee had applied its entire receipts for charitable pu...
- Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central… vs M/S Gokul Kripa Colonizers & Developers…Jaipur13 Nov 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were barred by limitation, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. Additionally, the Tribunal found that penalty under Section 271E was not sustainable due to the absence of satisf...
- Vimal Todi, Indore vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax…Indore6 Mar 2026Allowed
Also relies on Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra v. JCIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the penalty order was time-barred under Section 275(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal relied on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court, which was upheld by the Supreme Court, stating that...
More judgments on Section 11
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 531/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 530/NAG/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
