IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.725/Del/2025, A.Y. 2023-24 Rose Trust, Dy. Commissioner of B-60/61, C/o Bajaj Auto Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-49(1), Naraina Ind. Area, Phase-II, Vs. Civic Centre, Mito Road New Delhi-110028 New Delhi PAN: AAATR0380G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by Ms. Vasanti Patel, AR Sh. Mahendra Gohel, CA Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 10/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM This appeal of the assessee for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2023-24 is directed against the order dated 31.12.2024 of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mysore [‘Addl. CIT(A)’].

2. Considering the entire grounds of appeal and facts of the case, it is evident that we are tasked to decide the sole issue in dispute that whether the surcharge @ 37% levied by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) on income of Rs.34,07,065/- (excluding dividend income of Rs.6,09,34,668/- out of the returned income of Rs.6,43,41,730/-) as against the admitted surcharge @

15% is justified and in accordance with the law.

3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant assessee, a trust not availing benefits of section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’), filed its Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year on 19.07.2023 declaring income of Rs.6,43,41,730/- (including dividend income of Rs.6,09,34,668/-) of the relevant year. The said ITR was processed under section 143(1) of the Act, wherein the tax liability of Rs.2,75,02,229/- was determined as against the admitted tax liability of Rs.2,28,61,563/-. The AO (CPC) levied surcharge @ 37% as against the admitted surcharge of 15% as per the ITR. Aggrieved, the assessee filed a rectification petition under section 154 of the Act before the AO for revising the surcharge to 15% instead of 37% levied on entire returned income of Rs.6,43,41,730/-. In pursuance of the said rectification petition, the AO revised the surcharge rate of 15% on the dividend income of Rs.6,09,34,668/- only and not on the remaining returned income of Rs.34,07,065/- (the returned income of Rs.6,43,41,730/- minus the dividend income of Rs.6,09,34,668/-). Thus, the issue in dispute here is only the levy of surcharge @ 37% on the income Rs.34,07,065/-. Aggrieved with the processing under section 143(1) of the Act, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal as under: -

“8.1 The appellant was not having any income under section 115AD of the Act. For the AY 2023-24, the amount of income-tax computed under this sub- section shall be increased by a surcharge is to be calculated as under as the appellant was having any income under section 115AD of the Income-tax Act, and not having any income chargeable to tax under sub-section (1A) of section 115BAC of the Income Tax Act: —

"(a) in the case of every individual or Hindu undivided family or association persons except in a case of an association of persons consisting of only companies as its members, or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, or every artificial juridical person referred to in sub-clause (vii) of clause (31) of section 2 of the Income-tax Act, not having any income under section 115AD of the Income-tax Act, and not having any income chargeable to tax under sub-section (1A) of section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act,-

(i) having a total income exceeding fifty lakh rupees but not exceeding one crore rupees, at the rate of ten per cent of such income-tax;

(ii) having a total income exceeding one crore rupees, but not exceeding two crore rupees, at the rate of fifteen per cent of such income-tax;

(iii) having a total income exceeding two crore rupees, but not exceeding five crore rupees, at the rate of twenty-five per cent of such income-tax; and (iv) having a total income exceeding five crore rupees, at the rate