Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Government Body (AOP), failed to file its income tax return, leading the AO to issue a notice under Section 148. The AO subsequently made additions of Rs. 33,00,00,000/- for unexplained investment under Section 69A and Rs. 1,17,567/- as income from 'business and profession'. The Ld. CIT(A) provided relief, concluding that the assessee was exempt from taxation under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) as a Government of India funded educational institute.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) carefully reviewed the Ld. DR's arguments and the case records. The Tribunal determined that the Ld. CIT(A) had correctly applied the legal provisions based on its findings in paragraph 6.2 of the impugned order and had validly granted relief. Consequently, the ITAT decided not to intervene with the CIT(A)'s conclusions.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the assessee exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) without establishing the satisfaction of Rule 2BBB, and consequently deleting the additions made by the AO.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 148, Section 69A, Section 10(23C)(iiiab), Rule 2BBB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI
Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward – 2(3), Guwahati, Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, GS Road, Guwahati, Assam, Guwahati - 781005 .....................…...……………....Appellant vs. National Institute of Technology, Chumekedima, Dimapur, Nagaland, Dimapur – 797103 [PAN: AABAN5223A] ...…..…................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Aadarsh Agarwal, FCA Department represented by : Sanjay Jha, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 03.12.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 03.12.2025
ORDER
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 25.02.2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi (hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)].
1.1 In this case, the brief facts are that the assessee is a Government Body in the status of an AOP. The assessee had not filed its return of income for this year and thereafter the Ld. AO issued a notice u/s 148 of National Institute of Technology the Act, after which an addition of Rs. 33,00,00,000/- was made under Section 69A of the Act on account of alleged unexplained investment. A second addition was made of Rs. 1,17,567/- under the head income from ‘business and profession’. Aggrieved with this action, the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where, through the following findings, relief was given to the assessee:
“6.2. As submitted by the appellant in the Grounds of appeal and the statement of facts, the appellant being a Government of India funded educational Institute funded by the Government of India, the same being exempt from taxation according to the provisions of section 10(23c)(iiiab), the additions made by the Ld. AO do not have a leg to stand on. The appellant being a Central Government Funded Educational Institute of National Importance and run autonomously under the Ministry of Human Resources, Govt of India is equivalent to a government body. Hence, its income and expenditure as part of the Consolidated Funds of India and also when it is eligible for income tax exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiab), there is no scope of any addition by the Ld. AO.” 1.2 Aggrieved with this action of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:
“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by holding that the assessee is exempt from tax u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act without giving any finding of the fact that the condition prescribed under Rule 2BBB was satisfied in its case.
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by deleting the addition of Rs. 30,01,17,567/- made by the AO without establishing that the assessee is exempted u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act r.w. Rule 2BBB.
That further ground or grounds of appeal
may be submitted on or before the date of hearing.”
2. On the last date of hearing, none attended on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR. The Ld. DR pointed out that the assessee was duty bound to file his return of income so that any claim of exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act could be considered for being granted. Thereafter, the Ld. DR supported the orders of Ld. AO and assailed the action of Ld. CIT(A).
National Institute of Technology 3. We have carefully considered the averment of Ld. DR and have gone through the records before us. We find that through the findings in paragraph 6.2 of the impugned order (supra), the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly applied the provisions of law to the facts of the case and has granted relief. Accordingly, we do not deem it fit to interfere in the said findings in any manner whatsoever.
In result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 03.12.2025