JAI SHIVRAI PRATISHTHAN,PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1673/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Shivrai Pratishthan, a public charitable trust engaged in educational activities, which faced a delay in filing an appeal against an intimation order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The intimation order, issued by the CPC in Bengaluru, denied the trust's claim for exemption under section 11 of the Act for the assessment year 2020-21. The appeal to the CIT(A) was filed with a significant delay of 414 days, attributed to the death of the trust's auditor and the trustees' lack of knowledge about the tax compliance and proceedings. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's judgment in Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, condoned the delay and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708416 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMOL KHAIRNAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B. PHADKE
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1673/PUN/2024 नधा\u000fरण वष\u000f / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Jai Shivrai Pratishthan, Lane No.11, Praramhansangar, Paud Raod, Kothrud- 412108. PAN : AABTJ1568P Vs. ITO, Exemption Ward- 1(1), Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, AM: This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Chandigarh [‘Ld. CIT(A)’] u/s 250 of the Act dated 04.07.2024 which is arising out of the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act for Assessment Year 2020-21 issued on 24.03.2022 by the CPC, Bengaluru. Assessee by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 14.07.2025 ITA No.1673/PUN/2024 2 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation as there was a delay of 414 days in filing of the appeal. Following affidavit has been filed :- “1. Jai Shivrai Pratishthan hereafter referred to as \"Appellant\" is trust is registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 under Regt. No. F-8461, Pune and also under Societies Registration Act, 7136-93 engaged in the educational activities and established various schools in the Pune and nearby villages. 2. The Learned AO, CPC-Banglore vide intimation order u/s 143(1) of ITA, 1961 on 24/03/2022 thereby denied the appellant's claim for exemption u/s 11 of ITA, 1961. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred to file an appeal before learned CIT(A), NFAC on 11-06-2023. Following table denotes the computation of delay of 414 days: Particulars Dates Date of 143(1) Intimation order 24/03/2022 Last date of filing appeal before learned CIT-(A) 22/04/2022 Date of filing appeal 11/06/2023 Delay in filing of appeal 414 Days 3. Learned CIT(A) vide order passed u/s 250 of ITA, 1961 dated 04-07-2023 rejected the appeal of appellant due to delay of 414 days in filing the said appeal without going into merits of the case Reasons for delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A): 4. Around 2021, auditor of the trust namely Late Prakash Sitaram Dhekane who actively looked after income tax compliances of the appellant trust, unfortunately demised. As such, the burden of the additional responsibilities fell on the \"trustees\" who had no any knowledge of income tax provisions and compliances. Copy of the death certificate of the Late Prakash Dekhane is attached as Annexure-01. ITA No.1673/PUN/2024 3 5. Around the second week of May 2023, one of the trustees of the appellant trust visited Bank, in order to deposit certain amount in the said bank account of the trust. At that time, the bank officials informed the Trustee that the said bank account had been attached by the Income Tax Officer (Exemption). On being so informed, the Trustees visited the Income Tax Office at Pune and only at that time, they were informed by the Officer that huge tax demand had been raised by the Income Tax Dept. against the appellant trust 6. Due to unfortunate demise of the auditor and due to lack of awareness about e-proceedings of income tax and the undersigned being not much aware of the nitty-gritties of the trust's tax matters, did not realize the factum of passing of the intimation order passed u/s 143(1) of ITA, 1961 for a long time. By that time, delay had already crept in. 7. Considering the above, the trustees approached Tax Counsel from Pune for taking further advice in this matter. However, by that time, the delay had already crept in. Thereafter, the tax consultant filed appeal on 11/06/2023 after delay of 414 days. 8. As the delay in filing the appeal was purely unintentional and does not involve any legal issue or contention, request your goodself to kindly condone the delay and decade the appeal on merits. 9. Further, appellant has time to time submitted the response against hearing notices issued u/s 250 of ITA, 1961. However, learned CIT(A)-NFAC without entering into merits of the case and denied for condonation of the delay. 10. All the above stated facts and details and true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 11. This affidavit is executed on 3rd day of March, 2025” 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and prayed for remitting back the alleged issues to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. ITA No.1673/PUN/2024 4 4. Ld. DR did not object the prayer of the assessee. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The assessee a public charitable trust, furnished the return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 31.03.2021 and the same processed u/s 143(1)(a) on 24.03.2022 and certain adjustments made resulting into additions in the hands of the assessee. The prima-facie adjustments made by the CPC were challenged before Ld. CIT(A) but with the delay of 414 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated the reasons for the said delay in an affidavit and the same are extracted above (supra) and after carefully going through the same and applying the ratio laid down by the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382 dated 21.03.2025 and by sub- serving the cause of justice, condone the delay in filing of the appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Further, since Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Needless to mention here that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee as contemplated in ITA No.1673/PUN/2024 5 section 250(6) of the Act. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the instant appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 14th day of July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 14th July, 2025. Sujeet आदेश क\u0007 \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant. 2. \b यथ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. The Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Chandigarh. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब\u0013च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "