KAPSE FOUNDATION YEOLA,YEOLA V. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

ITA 1430/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kapse Foundation Yeola, a public charitable trust, which filed an appeal against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2022-23. The appeal was initially dismissed by CIT(A) due to a significant delay in filing, which the Tribunal later found justifiable. The primary contention arose from an Intimation Order by CPC assessing the income at Rs.2.81 crore due to disallowance of expenditure, which was claimed to be filed belatedly. The Tribunal emphasized a justice-oriented approach over a technical one, referencing the Supreme Court's judgment in Raheem Shah & ANR Vs Govind Singh & Ors, and decided to remit the case back for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778764 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Raheem Shah & ANR Vs Govind Singh & Ors, Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P. MURKUNDE
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Rectification of order; Charitable institution

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1430/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Kapse Foundation Yeola, Vadgaon, Balhe Matulthan, Yeola Yevla – 423403 Maharashtra PAN : AAEAK8377R Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Nashik Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2022-23 is against the order dated 12.03.2025 of CIT(A)/NFAC, passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of Intimation Order dated 31.12.2023 passed u/s.143(1) of the Act. 2. When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and available material on record. 3. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. Return for A.Y.2022-23 filed on Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 22.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 14.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1430/PUN/2025 Kapse Foundation Yeola 2 25.03.2023 declaring Nil income. Return processed by the CPC u/s.143(1) assessing the income at Rs.2.81 crore by making disallowance of the expenditure of Rs.2.81 crore on the ground that Form No.1B was filed belatedly. 4. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of 574 days. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the days. A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that the prime reason for the delay stated by the assessee was that the office bearers of the trust serving in Honorary capacity has not seen the Income Tax Portal and was not acquainted with it. Therefore, they were not aware about passing of the Intimation by CPC. Immediately after noticing, the appellant approached the ld. AO for Rectification but no Rectification order was passed. Due to all these events, there was delay in filing of the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 5. The appellate remedy or forum is created by the statute is to rest the dispute and not to accelerate for higher forum perfunctorily. We would like to refer the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raheem Shah & ANR Vs Govind Singh & Ors [CIVIL APPEAL No.4628 OF 2023, dated 24.07.2023], wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court while dealing with tax litigation, held that the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC being a quasi- judicial authority was expected to adopt justice oriented approach rather resorting to iron-cast technical one however the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC came to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine on the ground of delay without even according a fair opportunity of hearing. We find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1430/PUN/2025 Kapse Foundation Yeola 3 ld.CIT(A)/NFAC ought to have condoned the delay in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). We therefore condone the delay of 574 days in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 6. Considering the totality of facts and without offering any comments on merits of the case, we deem it fit to set-aside the impugned order and remit all the issues to the file of Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC for de-novo adjudication and pass a speaking order in terms of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to assessee. Assessee is directed to adduce all the requisite documents to substantiate the grounds of appeal. Assessee is also directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 14th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 14th October, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1430/PUN/2025 Kapse Foundation Yeola 4 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "