आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण , च(cid:503)ीगढ़ (cid:586)ायपीठ “एसएमसी” , च(cid:503)ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “SMC”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE (cid:373)ी लिलत कु मार, (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735)

BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं ITA No. 1298/Chd/ 2025 ./

िनधा१रण वष१ Assessment Year : 2013-14 /

Shri Sankat Mochan Hanuman बनाम ITO Exemption Ward Solan Mandir Society Sankat Mochan Tara Devi Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171010 (cid:725)ायी लेखा सं PAN NO: AAATS4007K ./

अपीलाथ५ Appellant ঋ(cid:529)थ५ Respondent / /

िनधा१ौरती की ओर से Assessee by : Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Adv with Sh. Praveen Sharma /

& Sh. Shantany Sahota Adv. (virtual)

राज(cid:738) की ओर से Revenue by : Shri Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR /

सुनवाई की तारीख Date of Hearing : 17/03/2026 /

उदघोषणा की तारीख Date of Pronouncement : 18/03/2026 /

आदेश Order /

PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M:

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 14.08.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 2013–14 arising out of the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a religious institution/temple society registered under section 12A of the Act and is stated to be governed by the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Hindu Public Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1984 and administered under the control of Government authorities.

3. The case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 on the basis of information received under section 133(6), wherein it was noticed that the assessee had not applied 85% of its income and had not exercised a valid option under section 11(2). In response to notice issued under section 148, the assessee filed its return and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with section 147, determining total receipts at Rs. 75,61,210/-, application of income at Rs. 42,79,703/-

and computing a shortfall of Rs. 21,47,325/-, which was brought to tax. The Assessing Officer further denied the benefit of accumulation under section 11(2) on account of non-filing of Form No. 10 within the prescribed time.

4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the validity of reopening and confirmed the addition on merits by holding that the assessee had failed to apply 85% of its income as required under section 11(1)(a), had not complied with the provisions of section 11(2) due to non-filing of Form No. 10 within the prescribed time, and that the claim of exemption under section 10(23BBA) was not tenable as the assessee was not a “body or authority” as envisaged under the said provision.

5. Before us, the Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the assessee temple is governed by the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Hindu Public Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1984 and is administered through Government authorities, and therefore its income is eligible for exemption under section 10(23BBA) of the Act.

6. It was contended that this crucial aspect has not been properly examined either by the Assessing Officer or by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has been granted the benefit of exemption under section 10(23BBA) in subsequent assessment years and copies of the relevant assessment orders were placed on record.

7. It was contended that the non-filing of the return of income for the year under consideration was on account of a bona fide belief that the assessee was not a taxable entity in view of the applicability of section 10(23BBA), and therefore, such procedural lapse should not disentitle the assessee from claiming exemption.

8. It was further argued that the Ld. CIT(A) adopted a hyper-technical and pedantic approach in denying the benefit, ignoring the fact that the Department itself has accepted the claim of exemption in subsequent years. Reliance was placed on judicial