Skip to main content

Saraswati Vidhya Mandir Inter College vs. Income Tax Officer

Case No: ITA No.69/Alld/2024
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad
Date: 30 Sep 2024

Parties Involved

appellantSaraswati Vidhya Mandir Inter College
respondentIncome Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(5), Banda

Facts Summary

The facts of the case are that the Department came into the possession of information that the assessee had entered into transaction of cash deposit during the demonetization period of Rs.14,08,970/- in A/c No.20716267395 and Rs.2,10,500/- in A/c No. 20716251567 both at Allahabad Bank, Hamirpur Branch. Since, the assessee had not filed a return, notices under section 142(1) were issued but proper compliance was not made by the assessee. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed an order under section 144 of the Act after conducting an enquiry through the medium of the Income Tax Inspector. The enquiry revealed that Saraswati Vidhya Mandir Inter College was an educational institution which was running under the society Saraswati Siksha Parishad, Hamirpur. There were 1252 students in this school which was associated with Uttar Pradesh Board of High School & Intermediate Education, Prayagraj. The society, Saraswati Siksha Parishad was also registered in the office of Registrar of Firms & Societies, Uttar Pradesh under Registration No. J-282/2016, File No. J-4818, vide Certificate No.888 dated 27.06.2016. During the conduct of the enquiry, the Income Tax Inspector collected the required documentary evidence from the office of the assessee institution. Copies of bank accounts were also obtained by issue of notices under section 133(6) of the Act. But the ld. Assessing Officer thereafter rejected all the documentary evidences collected in respect of receipt and expenditure, as he

Decision in favour of

Assessee

Legal Issues

  • 1. Whether the ld. AO as well ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act, 1961 of charging the addition u/s 115BBE of the Act even though the same is mistake apparent on record.
  • 2. Whether the ld. AO as well ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act, 1961 of charging the addition u/s 115BBE of the Act even though the case was passed u/s 144 of the IT Act, 1961 by making addition of Rs. 23,35,100/- on account of excess of fee over the expenditure taxable in the hands of assessee institution but erred in charging the same u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being mistake apparent from record.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning