BALESHWAR NATH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,,BHADOHI vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

PDF

ITA 63/ALLD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 September 2025AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member), SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA (Judicial Member)9 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee, an educational society, claimed exemption under sections 10 & 11 for AY 2021-22. Its return was timely filed, but the audit report Form 10B was uploaded with a short delay. The CPC processed the return under section 143(1), denying the exemption of Rs.1,99,78,949/- solely due to this technical delay. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, and the subsequent appeal to the ITAT was filed with a 5-month delay, attributed to an employee's departure and lack of intimation.

Held

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal to the ITAT. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue of exemption under sections 10 & 11 back to the Assessing Officer for proper verification and to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. This implies that the denial of exemption by CPC without proper inquiry was incorrect.

Key Issues

Whether exemption under sections 10 & 11 can be denied solely due to a technical delay in uploading Form 10B, despite timely return filing. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal to the ITAT.

Sections Cited

Section 10, Section 11, Section 12, Section 13, Section 12A(b), Section 12AB, Section 10(23C), Section 139(1), Section 143(1), Section 253(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA & SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A

2021-22 against impugned appellate order dated 30/08/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1068169189(1) of Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“ADDL/JCIT(A)” for short].

(B) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

(C) In this case the assessee’s return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and intimation was issued to the assessee, dated 20/09/2022 by Centralized Processing Centre (“CPC” for short) of the Income Tax department. In the aforesaid intimation dated 20/09/2022 issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.1,99,78,949/- wherein the exemption claimed by the assessee under section 10 & 11 of the Act was not allowed on the technical ground that Form-10B was not uploaded by the assessee in the Income Tax portal. The assessee filed appeal against the aforesaid intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, in the office of the learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 30/08/2024, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 30/08/2024. In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, a paper book containing the following particulars was filed from the assessee’s side:

(D) At the time of hearing, learned A.R. for the assessee drew our attention to written submissions, included in the aforesaid paper book, referred to in foregoing paragraph (C) of this order, for the ease of reference the written submissions are reproduced as under:

(D.1) At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the aforesaid written submissions contained in paper book. In his oral submissions, learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee will be satisfied if the alternate prayer of the assessee, contained in the above mentioned written submissions, to restore the issue in dispute back to the file of the Assessing Officer, is accepted. Learned D.R. expressed no objection to the aforesaid alternate prayer of the learned Counsel for the assessee and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. In view of the foregoing, the impugned appellate order is set aside and the issue in dispute regarding assessee’s claim for exemption u/s 10 & 11 is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper order after due verification and after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.