IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5551/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shree Ghatkopar Sarvajanik Income Tax Officer, Exem Jivdaya Khatu ward-2(3), Jivdaya Lane Agra Road, Mumbai Vs.

Ghatkopar, Mumbai – 400086 (PAN: AABTS9826R)

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Present for:

Assessee : Ms. Simran Dhawan, Advocate and Ravi Ganatra, CA Revenue : Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 02.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025

O R D E R

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068043238(1), dated 28.08.2024 passed against the assessment order by Income Tax Officer, Exem ward-2(3), Mumbai, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 14.11.2019 for Assessment Year 2017-18.

2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under:

“1. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant company's case and in law, the Ed. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in not quashing the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 14.11.2019

2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant company's case and in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 75,00,000/-made by the Assessing Officer merely due to delay of 6 days in filing Form no. 10

3. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant company's case and in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the view of the Assessing Officer that the purpose of accumulation u/s 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as declared in Form No. 10 does not warrant the allowance of a deduction by way of accumulation us 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was alleged by the Assessing Officer that the purpose of accumulation stated as 'Education' was not specific.

In this regard, it is stated that once assessee has accumulated income with a specific purpose and such purpose is specified in the main objects of the trust, then the Assessing Officer cannot deny such accumulation of income merely for the reason that purpose specified in Form No. 10 is vague and general in nature. As long as objects of the trust provide for such purpose, then the assessee can accumulate funds for the purpose which is specified in trust deed. This contention of the appellant has been upheld in the following judicial pronouncements:

a) Decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT (Exemption) vs. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Charitable Trust reported in [2019] 102 taxmann.com 122 where it was held that lack of declaration in Form No.10 regarding specific purpose for which funds were being accumulated by the assessee trust would not be fatal to the exemption claimed u/s.11(2) of the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2019) 263 Taxmann.com 247(SC) has dismissed SLP filed by the Department in the above case and has upheld the findings of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court.

b) Decision of Hon'ble Income Tax Appellant Tribunal, Chennai Bench 'C' in the case of Arhatic Yoga Ashram Management Trust vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai reported in I.T.A.No.2920/Chny/2017.

c) Decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Bharat Kalyan Pratisthan vs. Director of Income-tax (Exemption) reported in [2007] 160 Taxman 216 (Delhi).”

3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a trust registered as a charitable organisation with DIT(E), Mumbai, u/s.12A vide registration No.TR/3403, dated 29.11.1976. It filed its return of income on 13.11.2017 along with income and expenditure account, balance sheet and audit report in Form No.10B reporting total income at nil. Assessee clai