##PAGE1##

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE

“A” BENCH

BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL

MEMBER

AND

DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA 2221/PUN/2025

निर्धारणवर्ा/Asst. Year:2016-17)

AAATD1956A

Permanent Account Number:

Dutta MandirSansthan

ITO, Exemption Ward

Shri KshetraDeogad,

1(1)

KendriyaRajaswaBhawan,

Tal: Newasa,

GadkariChowk, Agra

Vs.

Ahmednagar-414603 Road, Nashik-422002

MAHARASHTRA.

MAHARASHTRA.

(अपीलध्वीAppellant) (्ቚ्ቓ्वीRespondent)

निर्धारिती्ቛधिध/Assessee

Shri S N Puranik, AR.

represented by:

िधजस्‍व्ቛधिध/Revenue Shri Rajesh Haladkar, Addl

represented by: CIT.Sr.DR

सुिवधईकीतधिीख/Date of conclusion of

21-07-2026

hearing:

घोषणधकीतधिीख/Date of pronouncement: 23-07-2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM:

The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of

Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Vishakapatnam passed under section 250 of

the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the following

grounds of appeal asunder:-

1. Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the Order u/sec

154 r.w.s. 143(1) passed by Assessing Officer, rejecting

rectification requested by assessee.Appellant prayed for

cancelling disallowance and confirming NIL income.

1

ITA 2221/PUN/2026

Dutta MandirSansthan

2. Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming denial of Form 10

for accumulation manually filed, set by post to ITO

Exemption, Nashik and denying application in u/sec 11

(deduction u/sec 11(2) brining to Tax Rs. 85 Lakhs).

Appellant prayed for cancellation of addition/

disallowance.

3. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing deduction u/sec 11(2)

of Rs. 85 laksh considering application form 10

manually filed dated 01/10/2016 and resubmitted

with application dated 3^rd July 2019.

4. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that said

application in fact is made in F.Y. 2018-19 and F.Y.

2019-20.

5. Appellant prayed for just and equitable relief.

6. Appellant denies liability to interest u/sec 234B, 234C

etc.

7. Appellant prays to add, alter, amend, take additional

grounds, submit additional evidence, and/or withdraw

the grounds, during appellate Proceedings.

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesseei s a public

trust registered u/sec 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The

assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17 on

13.10.2016 disclosing a total income of Rs.NIL after claiming

exemption u/sec11 of the Act. Further the assessee has filed

Form.No.10 manually with the I T O (Exemption) Nashik.

Subsequently, the return of income was processed u/sec

143(1) of the Act and it was found that the Form.No.10

2

ITA 2221/PUN/2026

Dutta MandirSansthan

was not filed on line before the due date of filling the return

of income u/sec139(1) of the Act and the assessee has violated

the provisions and the availing the benefit u/sec 11 of the

Act is denied and assessed the total income of

Rs.85,49,177/- vide order dated 3.01.2018. Subsequently,

the assessee has filed rectification petition u/sec154 of the Act

and was rejected vide order dated 23.11.2021.

3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal

before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the

grounds of appeal, statement of facts, submission of assessee

and findings of assessing officer and but has confirmed the

action of the CPC/A.O and dismissed the assessee’s appeal.

Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the

appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.

4. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A)

has erred in sustaining the denial of the claim of exemption

overlooking the facts and submissions. The CIT(A) has not

considered the information that the Form,no.10 was filed

before the ITO Exemption Nashik much before the

processing of return of income u/sec143(1) of the Act. Further,

the Ld.AR submitted that the delay in filling Form.No.10 on

application U/sec119(2)(b) of the Act was condoned vide

Approval order of CIT(Exemption) Pune dated 26.01.2026 and

prayed for allowing the appeal. Per contra, the Ld.DR

supported the order of the CIT(A).

5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the

material on record. The sol