UJJAINI MAHAKALI DEVATHANAM,SECUNDERBAD V. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(3), HYDERABAD

SA 28/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ujjaini Mahakali Devasthanam, a temple managed by a government-constituted body under the Endowment Act, 1987, seeking a stay against the recovery of outstanding demands from the Income Tax Department. The demands arose from reassessments and penalties for the assessment years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017. The temple argued that its income was exempt under section 10(23BBA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that it had not filed returns due to government management. The Income Tax Officer had reopened the assessments based on bank deposit information. The tribunal found the appeals were filed with a delay of 607 days and noted a previous ruling that the exemption claimed was not applicable to the temple. Consequently, the tribunal rejected the stay applications and granted an early hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780593 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Sri Venkateswara Swamy Devasthanam, Jamalapuram vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1(3), Hyderabad
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: KVSSN KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Bonafide belief; Application of stay

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Įी ͪवजय पाल राव, उपाÚ य¢ एवं Įी मधुसूदन सावͫडया, लेखा सदè य क े सम¢ । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Stay Application Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 Arising out of ITA Nos.1380 to 1385/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years - 2013-2014 to 2016-2017 Ujjaini Mahakali Devasthanam, SECUNDERABAD–500003. PAN AABFU6778J vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-1(3), Hyderabad - 500 004. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधाŊįरती Ȫारा/Assessee by: Sri KVSSN Kumar, Advocate राज̾ व Ȫारा/Revenue by:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 10.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10.10.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : By these six stay applications SA.Nos.27 to 32/ Hyd./2025, the assessee is seeking for stay against the recovery of the outstanding demand arising from Printed from counselvise.com 2 SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 assessment orders passed u/sec.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short \"the Act\"], for the assessment years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 as well as penalty orders passed u/sec.271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017, respectively. 2. Learned AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee Temple is managed by body constituted by the State Government under Endowment Act, 1987 and, therefore, the assessee was under the bonafide belief that the income is exempt u/sec.10(23BBA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The entire control of the affairs of the assessee is in the hands of the Government constituted Management Committee under the Endowment Act, 1987 and, therefore, the assessee after the Management was taken-over by the Government, did not file any return of income. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/sec.148 of the Act based on the information of deposit in the bank account of the assessee and then made the addition. He has further submitted that there was some Printed from counselvise.com 3 SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 confusion due to the reason that PAN was allotted in the name of the Firm instead of the Temple/Trust. He has thus prayed that, till the disposal of the appeals filed by the assessee, the recovery of the demand be stayed. He submitted that the entire deposit in the bank account represents the Hundi collection as well as opening balance of cash available with the assessee. 3. The Learned DR, on the other hand, has submitted that it is a case of non-filing of the return of income and further no books of accounts as well as filing audit report as required under the provisions of the Act. He has further submitted that the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the learned CIT(A) arising from assessment orders as well as penalty orders are barred by limitation of 607 days and, therefore, the appeals of the assessee till the delay in filing the appeals is condoned are not valid appeal. 3.1. He has further submitted that this Tribunal in the case of Sri Venkateswara Swamy Devasthanam, Jamalapuram vs., ITO (Exemption), Ward-1(3), Hyderabad in ITA.Nos.1002 & 1003/Hyd./2024, Order dated Printed from counselvise.com 4 SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 03.07.2025 has decided the issue of benefit of sec.10(23BBA) not available to the Temple/Trust/Society. 4. We have heard rival submissions and carefully perused the relevant record. At the outset, we note that the appeals filed by the assessee are against the orders of the learned CIT(A) arising from assessment orders passed u/sec.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act for the assessment years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 as well as arising from penalty orders passed u/sec.271B of the Act for the assessment years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017 are barred by limitation as there is a delay of 607 days in filing all these appeals. Thus, it is clear that the appeals filed by the assessee are subject to the condonation of delay and till then, there is no valid appeal for considering the prayer of the assessee of staying the recovery of the demand. Further, we find that the appeals of the assessee are already listed for hearing on 21.10.2025. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, when there is an inordinate delay in filing the appeals and the issue of exemption u/sec.10(23BBA) decided by this Tribunal against the assessee, we decline to grant any stay Printed from counselvise.com 5 SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 against the recovery of the demand. However, the hearing of the appeals is granted out of turn and preponed from 21.10.2025 to 16.10.2025. The date of hearing is announced in the open Court and noted by both the parties and, therefore, no notice shall be given for the same. The Registry is directed to list the appeals for hearing on 16.10.2025 as First on Board in the category of ‘Stay Rejected – Early Hearing Granted’. The parties are directed not to take any adjournment for hearing of the appeals. 5. In the result, stay applications SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 are rejected and early hearing is granted. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open Court on the conclusion of hearing i.e., on 10th October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA] [VIJAY PAL RAO] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Hyderabad, Dated 10th October, 2025 VBP Printed from counselvise.com 6 SA.Nos.27 to 32/Hyd./2025 Copy to : 1. Ujjaini Mahakali Devasthanam, H.No.3-4-30, 3-4-31- 40, Mahakali Street, SECUNDERABAD – 500 003. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-1(3), Aaykar Bhavan, Opp. LB Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. PIN – 500 004. Telangana. 3. Pr. CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT “B” Bench, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True copy// Printed from counselvise.com "