M/S SARASWATI SEWA SANSTHAN TRUST, LUCKNOW V. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE[JURIDICTIONAL:INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

ITA 129/LKW/2022

AI Insights

The case involves four appeals filed by the Saraswati Sewa Sansthan Trust against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17. The appeals were initially dismissed by the NFAC due to non-compliance. The Trust argued that they did not receive the necessary intimations from the Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore, which led to the delay in filing the appeals. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay to be bona fide and admitted the appeals for hearing, ultimately deciding to restore the cases for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123039 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH GIDWANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17 M/s Saraswati Sewa Sansthan Trust, R/o E-2177, Rajajipuram, Lucknow. PAN: AAETS 9292G Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Lucknow (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER BENCH: The captioned four appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi as per the following details: S.No. ITA Nos. Date of order of NFAC Assessment Year 1. 127/Lkw/2022 21/03/2022 2013-14 2. 128/Lkw/2022 21/03/2022 2014-15 3. 129/Lkw/2022 21/03/2022 2015-16 4. 130/Lkw/2022 21/03/2022 2016-17 2. Since all these appeals pertain to the same assessee, they were heard together and are being disposed of through this common order for the sake of convenience. Appellant by Ms. Shweta Mittal, CA Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, DR Date of hearing 23/05/2023 Date of pronouncement 24/05/2023 I.T.A. Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 2 2.1 The grounds raised in the four appeals are as under: ITA No. 127/Lkw/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) “1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order, which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 3. The Ld Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition made on the basis of the information sheet showing the computation of tax and not sending any Intimation order under relevant section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is illegal and improper. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition based on the computation of tax without properly considering the return of income filled by the appellant. 5. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in upholding total income of Rs. 93,50,210/- based on the information sheet as against NIL income declared in the income tax return. 6. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the net tax liability of Rs. 34,68,910/- as against the refund of Rs. 1,57,810/- as per income tax return. 7. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing assessment order which is contrary to the facts and law. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” ITA No. 128/Lkw/2022 (A.Y. 2014-15) “1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order, which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice. I.T.A. Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 3 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in determining total income of Rs. 1,74,88,569/- against NIL income declared in the income tax return. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in determining the net tax payable of Rs. 72,37,110/- in the information sheet as against the refund of Rs. 2,32,360/- as per income tax return. 5. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing assessment order which is contrary to the facts and law. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” ITA No. 129/Lkw/2022 (A.Y. 2015-16) “1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order, which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in confirming total income of Rs.50,00,000/- against NIL income declared in the income tax return. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the net tax liability of Rs. 14,80,000/- against the refund of Rs. 2,66,002/- as per income tax return. 5. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not considering the amount set apart u/s 11(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/-. I.T.A. Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 4 6. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing assessment order which is contrary to the facts and law. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal. ITA No. 130/Lkw/2022 (A.Y. 2016-17) “1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order, which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in confirming total income of Rs.20,40,769/- against NIL income declared in the income tax return. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the net tax liability of Rs. 2,68,360/- against the refund of Rs. 2,40,189/- as per income tax return. 5. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not considering the amount set apart u/s 11(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 20,40,769/-. 6. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing assessment order which is contrary to the facts and law. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal or raise any new ground of appeal during the pendency of appeal.” 3. At the outset, the ld. Authorized Representative submitted that all the four appeals were time barred by five days. She drew our attention to the delay condonation applications filed by the assessee in this regard. Our attention was also drawn to the affidavits filed, which supported the averments made in the delay condonation applications. She submitted that I.T.A. Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 5 the assessee did not receive the intimations sent by Centralized Processing Centre, (CPC), Bangalore in all the four cases, and thereafter, the assessee approached the grievance cell of the Income Tax Department for the purpose of service of intimations. It was further submitted that the assessee, subsequently, made a parallel request for providing intimations before the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who could provide the intimations only by 23.05.2022, whereas, the appeals were required to be filed before this Tribunal on or before 20.05.2022. Resultantly, the appeals could be filed only by 25.05.2022. It was submitted that, therefore, the reason for filing the appeals belatedly was bonafide and, therefore, the appeals of the assessee be admitted to be heard by this Tribunal. 4. The ld. Sr. DR had no objection to the delay being condoned. 5. In view of the delay condonation applications and the averments made therein, we condone the delay in all the four appeals and admit the same for hearing. 6. The ld. Authorized Representative submitted that all the four appeals had been dismissed by the NFAC ex-parte qua the assessee. She prayed that another opportunity may be provided to the assessee so that the issue involved could be suitably explained and resorted. 7. The ld. Sr. DR opposed the prayer of the ld. AR. 8. We have heard both the parties and have also perused the material placed on record. We note that the NFAC has dismissed the assessee’s appeals for non compliance. Looking into the peculiar facts of this case, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee deserves one more opportunity. Accordingly, we restore these four appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to adjudicate the issues at hand afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case. I.T.A. Nos.127 to 130/Lkw/2022 6 9. In the final result, all the four appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 24/05/2023) Sd/- Sd/- ( ANADEE NATH MISSHRA ) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 24/05/2023 Aks Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Asstt. Registrar