TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1740
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t be condoned. 3] The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant was prevented from sufficient cause in not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit and hence, the delay of 567 days in filing the appeal should have been condoned. 4] The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the reasons submitted by the assessee for delay in filing the appeal and accordingly, it is submitted that considering the said reasons, the delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned and the learned CIT(A) may be directed to decide the appeal on merits. 5] The assessee submits that it is duly registered u/s 12AA of the Act and therefore, it is entitled to claim exemption u/s 11 and the learned A.Ο. was not justified in disallowing the exemption claimed u/s 11 on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish the copy of the registration certificate u/s 12AA of the Act. 6] Without prejudice, the assessee submits that in case exemption u/s 11 is not allowable to the assessee trust, in that case, the learned A.O. erred in taxking the gross receipts of the assessee without appreciating that only the net income could be taxed as an incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. Ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). However, ld.DR accepted that the issue is covered in favour of assessee by order of the ITAT in Assessee's own case. Findings & Analysis : 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 7.1 In this case, ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the Delay and dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. We have perused the Affidavit filed by the Assessee regarding condonation and we are convinced that there was sufficient cause for Delay. The Assessee is a Trust of Doctors, the Trustees are also Doctors. Assessment Order was passed in 22nd May 2021, which was the Second Wave of Covid-19 Period. Being Doctors, all of them were providing medical emergency services during the Second Wave of Covid-19 Period. Therefore, ld. CIT(A) should have condoned the Delay. However, here onwards we are discussing the merits of the case. 8. In this case, Assessee is a Charitable Trust duly registered u/s.12A of the Act. Copy of the said order has been filed by the Assessee. The Assessing Officer in an order u/s.143(3) rejected assessee's claim for exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. The rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have already mentioned that Assessee is duly registered u/s.12A of the Act. This fact is also mentioned by ITAT in its order in ITA Nos.761, 762, 763, 765 & 766//PUN/2025 of Indian Medical Association Pune Branch Vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Pune vide order dated 31.07.2025. 12. The Assessee was denied exemption u/s. 11 vide order u/s. 143(1) of the Act, for A.Y. 2018-19 on identical grounds. The matter travelled before Hon'ble ITAT. 13. The ITAT in ITA Nos.761, 762, 763, 765 & 766//PUN/2025 of Indian Medical Association Pune Branch Vs. DCIT(supra) for A.Y.2014-15, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 has held as under : "17. In view of the above decisions, we hold that the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act on account of delay in filing of the return of income as well as delay in uploading the audit report in Form 108. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and direct the Assessing Officer/CPC to allow the claim of exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act 1961. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed. Since the assessee succeeds on the issue of claim of exemption u/s 11, therefore, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2. Further ld. AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd. (supra), wherein it is held as under: "4. The question whether it is permissible to the assessee to produce the audit report at the appellate stage, has already been answered by this court in CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries Ltd. [1993] 201 ITR 325 (Guj.), wherein it is held that the provision regarding furnishing of audit report along with the return has to be treated as a procedural provision, It is directory in nature and its substantial compliance would suffice. In that case, the assessee had not produced the audit report along with the return of income, but produced before completion of the assessment. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Shahzadanand Charity Trust [1997] 228 ITR 292 has reiterated the same principle holding that the benefit of exemption should not be denied merely on account of delay in furnishing the same, and it is permissible for the assessee to produce the audit report at a later stage either before the Income Tax Officer or before the appellate authority by showing a sufficient cause. This decision of Punjab ....