AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member:
The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.11.2025 of Id. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') wherein the appeal has been dismissed, against the rectification order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Act dated 06.01.2020.
The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay of 35 days in filing the present appeal. The contents of the application are reproduced as under:
Date: 12.06.2026
Before The Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench C, Delhi.
Subject: Prayer for condonation of delay in filing of appeal in ITA No. 2438/Del/2026 in the case of Gau Raksha Seva Samiti, PAN: AABTG1120C for the AY 2016-17, filed on 07.03.2026.
Hon'ble Bench,
Kindly refer to the matter cited as subject above. The appellant had filed appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT on 07.03.2026 against the order dtd. 25.11.2025 of Worthy CIT(A) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter referred to as "Act"). There was a delay of 35 days in filing of this appeal. The facts behind the said delay and prayer for condonation of the same is as under:
1.The present case relates to order passed u/s 154 dtd. 06.01.2020 by the Ld. AO where against the appellant filed appeal before Worthy CIT(A) on 12.02.2020 which was then dismissed vide order dtd. 25.11.2025.
2.Against the order dtd. 25.11.2025 passed by Worthy CIT(A), the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble ITAT on 07.03.2026. The due date to file such appeal was 31.01.2026 and hence, it has been filed late by 35 days beyond the prescribed limitation period.
3.Regarding the reasons for delay in filing the present appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, it is most respectfully submitted as under:
a. The appellant is a charitable trust which has not remained in active operation for the last about 5 to 6 years. Owing to such prolonged inactivity, no effective administrative or managerial mechanism remained functional for attending to statutory matters, monitoring tax proceedings, or regularly supervising departmental communications. Consequently, the affairs of the trust, including receipt and follow-up of tax-related notices and orders, remained largely unattended during the relevant period.
b. It is further submitted that the email address reflected on the Income-tax Portal, namely [email protected], belonged to an erstwhile employee of the appellant trust. The said person had ceased to be associated with the appellant much prior to the relevant period and was employed elsewhere. However, due to the dormant and non-functional state of the trust, the said email address continued to remain recorded on the portal and could not be updated in time.
c. Consequently, the notices, communications, intimations and appellate orders issued by the Income Tax Department on the aforesaid registered e-mail address were never brought to the knowledge of the present management of the appellant trust. Since the said e-mail address was neither being actively monitored nor remained under the control of any responsible person acting on behalf of the trust, the appellant remained genuinely unaware of the passing of the impugned order and the consequential limitation period prescribed for filing the present appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
d. It is further submitted that immediately upon becoming aware of the impugned order and after obtaining the relevant records and professional advice, the appellant took prompt steps to prefer the present appeal without any further delay.
e. The appellant respectfully submits that the delay has occurred on account of bona fide, unavoidable, and compelling circumstances beyond its control, and not due to any wilful default, negligence, or deliberate inaction. The appellant has not derived, nor could it have derived, any advantage or benefit from such delay. A duly sworn & attested affidavit of authorized signatory of the assessee, in this regard, is attached herewith. The appellant has not gained any advantage by not filing the appeal in time.
In the light of above facts and more so in the interest of natural justice, it is prayed that the delay of 35 days in filing of the appeal may please be condoned by invoking Your Honour's powers u/s 253(5) of the Act. We shall be highly obliged.
Thanking You,
Yours Faithfully,
For Gau Raksha Seva Samiti
We have considered the contents of the condonation application and the submissions made by the Id. AR. We find that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the reasons for the delay. In view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), wherein it has been held that a liberal approach should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay to substantial justice, we are satisfied that the assessee has shown sufficient cause. Accordingly, the delay of 35 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
Facts of the case as culled out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee filed its return of income on 25.07.2016 declaring total income at Nil. The said return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and demand of Rs.1,29,680/- was raised. Thereafter, the assessee filed an application u/s 154 stating that an amount of Rs.8,96,584/- had been inadvertently reported in the return u/s 11(1B) of the Act, whereas the said amount represented the amount accumulated in the preceding year pursuant to Form No. 10 and utilized during the year under consideration. The rectification application was rejected by the Assessing Officer. During the appellate proceedings before the Id. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that during F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015-16, it had filed Form No. 10 in respect of Rs.8,96,584/- for specific purposes and that the said amount was utilized during F.Y. 2015-16 relevant to A.Y. 2016-17. It was further submitted that due to an inadvertent clerical mistake on the part of the staff of the counsel, the amount was wrongly reported u/s 11(1B) while filing the return. The assessee also furnished its financial statements and computation and claimed that during the year.
Aggrieved by the rectification order u/s 154, the assessee filed appeal before the Id. CIT(A). The Id. CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessee observing that the return is a statutory document and the assessee is responsible for the correctness of the particulars furnished therein. It was further observed that the mistake in the return itself could not be regarded as a mistake apparent from the record amenable to rectification u/s 154 of the Act. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds of appeal:
'1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A), in Appeal No. NFAC/2018-19/10376212 has erred in passing order dtd. 10.10.2025 in contravention of provisions of S. 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as "Act").
2.That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the rejection of rectification u/s 154.
3.That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in failing to appreciate that the sum of Rs. 8,96,584/- came to be reflected in ITR u/s 11(1B) solely on account of an inadvertent and clerical misreporting, whereas in its true legal character and substance the said amount represented application of income validly accumulated in the preceding year pursuant to a duly and timely filed Form No. 10 in accordance with s. 11(2) of the Act.
4.That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in treating the inadvertent reporting u/s 11(1B) as taxable income despite the undisputed fact that the accumulated amount was duly applied for charitable purposes during the year and no real income accrued to the appellant.
5.That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in upholding the adjustment made by Ld. AO during processing/ rectification proceedings u/s 143(1) / 154, which is beyond the scope of those sections.
6.That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order passed by the Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been framed in extreme haste and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant."
We have heard the Id. AR and the Id. DR. The Id. AR for the assessee submitted that the issue has not been examined on its correct factual and legal perspective. It was submitted that the amount of Rs.8,96,584/- was not a fresh income of the assessee for the year under consideration, but was an amount accumulated in the preceding year after filing Form No. 10 and was actually utilized for the specified charitable purposes during the year under consideration. It was further submitted that the incorrect disclosure in the return was only an inadvertent clerical error.
The Id. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee had claimed before the lower authorities that an amount of Rs.8,96,584/- was accumulated in the preceding year and that Form No. 10 had been filed in respect thereof. The assessee has further claimed that the said amount was utilized during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer, in the remand report, has primarily rejected the claim on the ground that the amount was declared by the assessee itself u/s 11(1B) in the return and that the mistake was not apparent from the record. In our considered view, the issue in dispute in the present appeal requires examination of the actual facts relating to accumulation and utilization of the amount of Rs.8,96,584/-. The assessee has claimed that Form No. 10 was filed in the preceding year and the amount accumulated thereunder was utilized during the year under consideration. The assessee has also relied upon its accounts and computation of application of income. Therefore, merely because the amount was inadvertently reflected in a particular column of the return, the substantive claim of the assessee regarding the nature and utilization of the said amount, particularly when the assessee claims that the relevant Form No. 10 and financial records were available, requires proper factual verification.
Hence, in the interest of substantial justice and for proper adjudication of the issue in dispute, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The Assessing Officer shall examine the claim of the assessee regarding Rs.8,96,584/- after verifying the Form No. 10 filed for A.Y. 2015-16, the relevant books of account, audited financial statements, bank statements and such other documents as may be furnished by the assessee. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer shall decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after affording reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.