BALWAS CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 897/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Balwas Charitable Trust appealing against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2010-11. The Trust was unaware of the CIT(A)'s order due to their accountant's oversight in checking emails, leading to a significant demand raised against them. Upon receiving a 'Recovery Notice for Outstanding Demand' from the ITO, the Trust sought to challenge the order. The Tribunal, considering the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., prioritized substantial justice and condoned the delay in filing the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33006 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEYAQAT ALI AAFAQUI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI GANATRA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Charitable institution
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 897/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Balwas Charitable Trust 265-E, Ballasis Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai – 400008. Vs. ITO(E)-1(1) Room No. 611, 6th Floor, Cumballa Hill MTNL TE Bldg, Pedder Road, Ld.DR. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai PAN/GIR No. AABTB0244Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ravi Ganatra Revenue by Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR Date of Hearing 25.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.04.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 30.05.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / CIT(A), for the A.Y 2010-11. 2 ITA No. 897/Mum/2025 Balwas Charitable Trust, Mumbai 2. At the very outset, we noticed that there is a delay in filing the present appeal. In this regard Ld. AR drawn our attention towards affidavit filed by the assessee, thereby seeking condonation of delay and the contents of which were reproduced here in below: 7. The appellant state that only after receiving \"Recovery Notice for Outstanding Demand\" from Ld. A.O dated 28-01-2025, the appellant has become aware that Ld. CIT(Appeal) has already passed ex-parte order u/s 250 of the Act against appellant vide its Order dt 30-05-2024 since no reply was filed received from the assessee. The appellant is shocked and surprise to know about the above Ld. CIT(Appeal) Order due to which huge demand has been raised. 8 The appellant pleads that all the notices issued by Ld. CIT(Appeal) was sent on e- mail id of accountant who is employee of the assessee. The accountant due to oversight and mistake have not checked on email the notice issued by Ld. CIT(Appeal). Thus the appellant was totally unaware of the all notices issued by learned CIT(Appeal) due to which the appellant was not able to file against CIT(A) 3. Considering the entire factual position as explained before us and also keeping in view, the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC), wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of none deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principle of advancing substantial justice is of ‘prime importance’. Hence 3 ITA No. 897/Mum/2025 Balwas Charitable Trust, Mumbai considering the fact that the assessee has justifiably and property explained the delay which occurred in filing the appeal the expression ‘sufficient cause’ is being liberally construed, therefore we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the present and order. Accordingly, now the appeal is admitted to be heard on merits. 6. After hearing the parties on the main appeal and after going through the records, we noticed that assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) and did not file any submissions, Therefore taking a lenient view after considering the above factual and legal position, we are of the firm opinion that the ends of justice would be met only by restoring the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 7. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld.CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 4 ITA No. 897/Mum/2025 Balwas Charitable Trust, Mumbai 8. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.04.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 04/04/2025 KRK, PS आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u000eथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai "