IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3921/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-2013)

Asia Society India Centre

1021-22, 10^th Floor, Maker Chamber V, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021, Maharashtra.

[PAN:AAFCA6817M] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) 1(1), Vs Mumbai Pratishtha Bhawan, Churchgate, Maharshi Karve Road, Dhobi Talao, New Marines Lines, Mumbai – 400020, Maharashtra. …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Rakesh Joshi For the Respondent/Department : Shri Ram Krishn Kedia Date Conclusion of hearing : 24.10.2024 Pronouncement of order : 22.01.2025

O R D E R

[

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1. The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the order, dated 10/06/2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘ the Act’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 26/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The Assessee has raised following revised grounds of appeal filed on

16/09/2024:

“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appellate Centre [Ld. CIT(A)] has erred in law and in facts and circumstances of the case in upholding the Assessment Order dated 26/03/2015 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act in determining the assessed income at Rs.54,27,305/- as against the returned income of Rs.NIL.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in passing the order without observing the principles of natural justice.

3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld.

Assessing Officer [Ld. Assessing Officer] in making addition and disallowance of unspent accumulation made u/s. 11(2) of the Income Tax Act in the Financial Year 2006-07 Rs.23,62,687/- and Financial Year 2007-08 Rs.30,64,418/- a total of Rs.54,27,105/- which was since reversed and spent in the financial year 2011-12 being alleged deemed Income under section 11(3) of the Income Tax Act.

4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld.

Assessing Officer in invoking the provision of section 11(3) of the Act in A.Y.2012-13, without considering the relevant provision of law.”

3. The Appellant is a not-for-profit company incorporated under Section

25 of the Companies Act and holding valid registration under Section 12A of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2012-2013, the Appellant filed return of income on declaring a deficit of INR.17,76,768/-. The aforesaid return was selected for regular scrutiny assessment. During the of the assessment proceedings, the Appellant was asked to submit the computation of Income for past 5 years [i.e. Assessment Year 2007-2008 to Assessment Year 2011-2012]. On perusal of the same, the Assessing Officer that the Appellant was allowed accumulation of INR.23,62,678/- and INR.30,64,418/- for the Assessment Year 2007-2008 and 2008-2009, respectively, under Section 11(2) of the Act which were to be utilized within the next five years for the purposes of buying office premises. The Assessing Officer noted that the aforesaid amount were not utilized for the said purpose and were used for the main objects. Invoking provisions contained in Section 11(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer treated the accumulation of INR.23,62,687/- and INR.30,62,418/- made for Assessment Year 2007-2008 and Assessment Year 2008-09, respectively, as deemed income of the Appellant for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. Thus, the Assessing Officer made an addition of INR.54,27,105/- in the hands of the Appellant vide Assessment Order, dated 26/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) of the Act.

4. Being aggrieved the Appellant preferred appeal before the CIT(A)

which was dismissed vide order dated 10/06/2024.

5. The Appellant has now preferred the present appeal challengi