ITAT Bangalore Judgments — March 2026

The Tribunal held that the assessee, a statutory body, carried on its activities on business principles to achieve its objectives, but this did not render it non-charitable. The proviso to Section 2(15) was examined in light of judicial pronouncements.

The Tribunal held that CBDT Circulars provide powers to condone delays in filing Form 9A and the return of income. The Tribunal also noted that several High Courts and Tribunals have held that furnishing forms is not mandatory if filed before assessment completion. The Tribunal deemed it fit to remit the issue to the AO to await the outcome of the second condonation application filed by the assessee.

The Tribunal held that the assessee's activities, though carried on business principles, were for the advancement of general public utility and not for profit. The proviso to Section 2(15) was found inapplicable as the primary purpose was charitable, not profit generation.

The Tribunal observed that the AO had conducted detailed inquiries and verified documents regarding long-term capital gains on mutual fund units, as per Section 55(2)(ac) of the Act. The PCIT's conclusion that the AO failed to make proper inquiries was not supported by evidence on record. Therefore, the revisional order passed by the PCIT was found to be incorrect.

The Tribunal held that since the revenue failed to submit its claims during the insolvency proceedings and the NCLT approved a resolution plan where government dues were nil, the outstanding demands could not be enforced against the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was rendered infructuous.