Jain Swetamber Murtipujak Tap Gachhya Upashrya Vs ITO (Exemption) (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Finance Act 2022 Amendment to Sec. 11(2)/11(3)(c) Held Prospective — Trust Entitled to 6-Year Window for Old Accumulations; CPC’s Addition of ₹6.75 Lakh Reduced to ₹90,000
In this appeal, a Jain religious trust challenged the intimation u/s 143(1) where CPC taxed ₹6,75,000/– invoking amended section 11(2)/11(3)(c), treating the earlier accumulation for FY 2017-18 as lapsed & unutilised. The Trust had filed Form 10 in FY 2017-18 for accumulation of ₹6,75,000/– and utilised ₹5,85,000/– during FY 2022-23 (AY 2023-24), offering the balance ₹90,000/– voluntarily as income. The Trust maintained that the 6-year utilisation window applicable to old accumulations remained unaffected by the Finance Act 2022 amendment, which was prospective.
CPC, however, denied the claim & brought entire ₹6,75,000/– to tax. The CIT(A) upheld CPC’s action by applying the amended law to past accumulations.
Before Tribunal, the Assessee argued that the amendment to section 11(3)(c), effective from 01.04.2023, applies only to fresh accumulations made on or after AY 2023-24 and cannot curtail the statutory 6-year window available to existing accumulations created under the earlier law. The Assessee relied on two recent rulings:
- Dadar Digambar Jain Mumukshu Mandal v. CIT(E) (Mumbai ITAT, 2025)
- Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University v. CIT(E) (Pune ITAT, 2025)
Both decisions held that the amendment is prospective and the 6-year period for past accumulations remains intact.
The Revenue could not dispute the above legal position.
Tribunal held that:
— For accumulation of FY 2016-17, the Trust had time till 31.03.2023 (six years). The Trust spent ₹5.85 lakh within that period and rightly offered only ₹90,000/– as unutilised income.
— CPC could not tax the entire accumulated amount merely because the amended law existed in AY 2023-24.
— The Finance Act 2022 amendment does not rescind or shorten the utilisation period for past accumulations.
Respectfully following Mumbai & Pune benches, Tribunal modified the addition:
