SHRI PRABHAS PATAN JAIN SWETAMBERMURTI PUJAK SANGH,VERAVAL, GUJARAT vs. ITO EXEMPTION WD 2, RAJKOT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee is a public charitable trust and had e-filed its return declaring Nil taxable income after setting off deemed income under section 11(3) against expenses claimed under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2). The CPC, processing under section 143(1), assessed the deemed income separately. The Tribunal observed that the assessee was not given an adequate opportunity of being heard, as notices were not served, and the assessee could not present its case effectively before the CIT(A). Citing the principle of natural justice and the decision in CIT v. Natwarlal Chowdary Charitable Trust, the Tribunal held that an opportunity must be provided before adjustments are made under section 143(1). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The assessee was also directed to contest its stand forthwith. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Shri Prabhas Patan Jain Swetambermurti Pujak Sangh, a registered charitable trust, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2021-22 on January 1, 2022, declaring a gross income of Rs. 1,80,69,123/-, including deemed income of Rs. 68,61,494/- under section 11(3). This income was set off against expenses claimed under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2), resulting in Nil taxable income. The Assessing Officer (CPC) processed the return under section 143(1) and assessed the income at Rs. 68,61,494/-, bringing the deemed income to tax separately. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal, confirming the addition. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment of Nil income returned by the appellant at Rs. 68,61,494/-, when the income was set off against expenses claimed under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2)? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 11(1)(a), 11(2), 11(3) and 143(1)). 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in failing to appreciate that the CPC travelled beyond its jurisdiction vested under section 143(1) of the Act? 3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in failing to appreciate that the CPC made the impugned adjustment in contravention to the first proviso to sub-section 1 of section 143? Assessee's Contentions: - The CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment of Nil income. The deemed income under section 11(3) was correctly set off against expenses claimed under sections 11(1)(a) and 11(2). - The CPC exceeded its jurisdiction under section 143(1) by making the adjustment. - The adjustment was made in contravention of the first proviso to section 143(1), which mandates an opportunity to be provided before adjustments. - Relied on the principle that principles of natural justice require an opportunity of being heard, citing the case of CIT v. Natwarlal Chowdary Charitable Trust (1189 ITR 656) for the requirement of an opportunity before adjustments under section 143(1). Revenue's Contentions: - The Ld. DR relied on the judgment of the Ld. CIT(A) and did not object to the prayer of the assessee for an opportunity to present the case before the lower authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [(in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 27.03.2024, which in turn assessment order passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department / Assessing Officer under section 143(1) vide order dated 28.12.2022. of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:
A.Y. 2021-22 Shri Prabhas Patan Jain v. ITO(E)
“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the assessment by the learned CPC of the Nil income returned by the appellant at Rs.68,61,494/-.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in failing to appreciate that the Ld. CPC has travelled beyond the jurisdiction vested u/s 143(1) of the Act.
3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in failing to appreciate that the Ld. CPC has made the impugned adjustment in contravention to the first proviso to sub-section 1 of section 143.”
4. That the appellant craves for leave to add, amend and/or modify the grounds of appeal
Facts of the case are that the appellant is a public charitable trust duly registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 as also under section 12A of the Income Tax Act. For the assessment year under consideration the appellant e-filed its return of income on 01/01/2022 declaring therein gross income of Rs. 1,80,69, 123/- which inter alia included deemed income u/s 11(3) of Rs.68,61,494/-. The said income was set off against expenses and claim u/s 11(1)(a) and 11(2) resulting in Nil taxable income. The Ld. CPC whilst processing the said return u/s 143(1) of the Act has assessed the income at Rs. 68,61,494/- by bringing to tax the deemed income u/s 11(3) separately. 3.1 The appellant also begs to submit that in accordance with the provisions of the first proviso to sub-section 1 of section 143, an opportunity has to be provided to it before any adjustments are made in the return. The appellant in this regard had raised two grievances on the portal which remained unresolved and the adjustment was made u/s 143(1)(a). The findings of the Ld. CPC are contrary to facts and unjustified in law and the appellant being aggrieved has preferred this appeal.
The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), against the order on 28.12.2022. That the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal with following observation:
A.Y. 2021-22 Shri Prabhas Patan Jain v. ITO(E)
“ Therefore, I find no infirmity in the addition made by the Ld. AO CPC. In this view of the matter, addition of Rs. 6861494/- is confirmed. Consequently, the grounds of the appellant are dismissed.”
The assessee filed an appeal before us against the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 28.12.2022.
During the course of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee is Public Charitable Trust and due to one reason (Notice not served) of the other reason, the assessee cannot filed the relevant documents in support of claim of expenses, the Ld. AR of the assessee prayed for an opportunity to be given to the assessee to present his case before the lower authority.
On the contrary, Ld. DR for the revenue relied on the judgement of the Ld. CIT(A) and not objected to the prayer of the assessee.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that for the assessment year 2021-22, the appellant e-filed its return of income on 01/01/2022 declaring therein gross income of Rs. 1,80,69, 123/- which inter alia included deemed income u/s 11(3) of Rs.68,61,494/-. The said income was set off against expenses and claim u/s 11(1)(a) and 11(2) resulting in Nil taxable income but was assessed at Rs. 68,61,494/- by bringing to tax the deemed income u/s 11(3) separately. Before the Honourable Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT v. Natwarlal Chowdary Charitable Trust (1189 ITR 656), which has since decided the issue in favour of the appellant in accordance with the provisions of the first proviso to sub-section 1 of section 143, that an opportunity A.Y. 2021-22 Shri Prabhas Patan Jain v. ITO(E) has to be provided to it before any adjustments are made in the return. We note that assessee was not given an opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A) because notices were only sent not served on assessee. We also note that assessee has appeared before the Ld. AO and furnished all the documents. It is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party should be granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to represent case. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A). We restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of this matter and pass a speaking order after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 11(1)(a)
- Sri Vidyanikethan Educational Trust… vs DCIT Exemption Cir, VijayawadaITA 412/VIZ/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Porwal Charitable Trust, Thane vs The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward…ITA 7604/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- The Somaiya Trust, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 2(4)…ITA 4057/MUM/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Jain Citizen Education Society, Surendra… vs ITO, Ward-2, Exmp, AhmedabadITA 737/AHD/2026[2023-2024]Status: Disposed14 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024
- Vanita Samaj, Mumbai vs Jurisdiction Exem Ward 2(4), MumbaiITA 8116/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026