DAKSHIN MAHARASHTRA VEERSHAIV SAMAJ,KOLHAPUR V. INCOMETAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR

ITA 929/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dakshin Maharashtra Veershaiv Samaj, a trust registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which appealed against the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurugram. The appeal was related to the assessment year 2018-19, where the assessee's claim for exemption under section 11 was denied due to the non-filing of Form No.10B along with the return of income. The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) had assessed the total income of the assessee significantly higher than reported, leading to the appeal. The Tribunal found that the entire gross receipts were incorrectly taxed as income without considering the expenditures, as the Form No.10B was not filed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669470 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.320/PUN/2023, ITA No.669/PUN/2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH HALADKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S SHINGTE
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 11; 10B

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.929/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dakshin Maharashtra Veershaiv Samaj, 715, Akkadevi Mahadev Mandap, Bindu Chowk, B- Ward, Kolhapur – 416002. Maharashtra. V s The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Kolhapur. PAN: AAATD4909P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Pramod S Shingte – AR Revenue by Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/06/2025 Date of pronouncement 25/06/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by Assessee against the order of ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2018-19 dated 17.03.2025, emanating from order u/s.143(1) of ITA No.929/PUN/2025 [A] 2 the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 16.07.2019. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Additional/Junior CIT(A)-1, Gurugram, NFAC erred in confirming the action of the 'AO', CPC of denying exemption under S. 11 in the intimation u/s 143(1) for delayed filing of Form 10B 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Additional/Junior CIT(A)-1, Gurugram, NFAC erred in not accepting the claim of the appellant, that the addition, if any, ought to have been restricted only to the Net commercial income and not the entire Gross Receipts. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, modify, delete or add a new ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the record placed before us. In this case, Assessee has filed Return of Income for A.Y.2018-19 on 27.11.2018. The due date for filing Return of Income u/s.139(1) was 30.09.2018. An order u/s.143(1) was passed by Centralized Processing Centre(CPC) on 16.07.2019 assessing the total income of the Assessee at Rs.17,34,624/- in place of Rs.3,12,920/- shown by assessee in the Return of Income. ITA No.929/PUN/2025 [A] 3 Aggrieved by the order u/s.143(1), Assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), Assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. Ld.AR submitted that Assessee is a Trust registered u/s.12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and Assessee had claimed exemption u/s.11 of the Act. However, ld.AR further submitted that due to technical reasons, Form No.10B was not filed along with the Return of Income. Ld.AR submitted that therefore, Assessee’s claim for exemption u/s.11 was denied, but ironically, Entire Gross Receipts has been taxed u/s.143(1) of the Act. Ld.AR pleaded that entire Gross Receipts cannot be taxed as there are expenditures and only the Net Income should have been taxed. Ld.AR took us through the page no.12 of the ld.CIT(A)’s order which has reproduced Income & Expenditure Account. Ld.AR, therefore, submitted that only the Net Income should have been taxed. Ld.AR relied on the decisions of the ITAT Pune in ITA No.320/PUN/2023 for A.Y.2018-19 and ITAT Pune Bench’s order in ITA No.669/PUN/2025 for A.Y.2015-16. ITA No.929/PUN/2025 [A] 4 4. It is observed from order u/s.143(1) of the Act, that total receipts have been taxed. In the ld.CIT(A)’s order, the Income and Expenditure Account has been reproduced, the same is reproduced here as under : PARTICULARS AMOUNT(RS.) COMMERCIAL INCOME INTEREST FROM BANKS OTHER RECEIPTS DIVIDEND 4,34,698 12,99,426 500 TOTAL COMMERCIAL INCOME –(A) 17,34,624 PARTICULARS AMOUNT(RS.) EXPENSES FOR DCOMMERCIAL INCOME EXPENSES ON THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST : EDUCATION DEPRECIATION AUDIT FEES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EXPENSES 5,008,308 1,18,153 5,540 3,30,681 1,98,830 TOTAL COMMERCIAL EXPENSES –(B) 11,61,512 NET COMMERCIAL INCOME (A-B) 5,73,112 4.1 Thus, as per the submission of the Assessee which has been reproduced by the ld.CIT(A), the Net Income was Rs.5,73,112/-. The assessee had raised this ground before the ld.CIT(A) and also relied on the decisions of the ITAT. However, ld.CIT(A) has not bothered to decide this issue. However, since ld.CIT(A) has reproduced the Income and Expenditure Account of the Assessee in ITA No.929/PUN/2025 [A] 5 his order, it means that ld.CIT(A) has verified the impugned Income and Expenditure Account. 5. Ld.CIT(A) has also recorded a fact that Assessee has not filed copy of Form No.10B during the appellate proceedings. We will also like to note that Assessee has not filed copy of Form No.10B before us. 6. Be it as it may be, in the absence of Form No.10B, the Income of the Assessee needs to be calculated on the Commercial Principle. Assessee has claimed deduction of various expenses. In the order u/s.143(1) of the Act, the CPC has considered entire receipts as Income of the Assessee. There is no provision u/s.143(1) for the CPC to consider entire receipts as Income of the Assessee, only because Form No.10B was not filed. Therefore, the order u/s.143(1) taxing the entire receipts is set-aside. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to tax only the Net Income after verification. Assessee shall file all the necessary details before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No.2 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. ITA No.929/PUN/2025 [A] 6 Ground No.1 : 7. This Ground No.1 is not pressed by the ld.AR, hence, Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25 June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 25 June, 2025/ SGR आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “एस एम सी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune. "