ALPASANKYATARA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,VIJAYPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIJAYAPURA

ITA 1928/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Alpasankyatara Co Op Credit Society, the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which was dated 31/07/2024 for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention was regarding the additions made by the AO under sections 143(3) read with section 147 and section 144B of the Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs. 1,10,55,240 and Rs. 43,36,000, which represented cash deposits and withdrawals respectively. The assessee argued that the AO had acknowledged their justification for the cash deposits but rejected it without any reasoning. The Tribunal found that both the AO and the CIT(A) failed to provide a reasoned order in rejecting the assessee's submissions, which is a mandatory requirement under section 250(6) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474075 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V PARITHIVEL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH V MUDHOL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1928/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Alpasankyatara Co Op Credit Society, Basavana Bagewadi Dist. Vijaypur – 586 203. PAN – AAEAA 5477 G Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Vijaypur. . APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ramesh V Mudhol, CA Revenue by : Shri V Parithivel, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 18.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.11.2024 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 31/07/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S /250/2024-25/1067182981(1) for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. At the outset, we note that there was delay in filing the appeal before us for 4 days only. The assessee has filed an application explaining the reasons for the delay, which was supported by the Affidavit and post office tracking documents. As per the assessee, the CA was busy in finalization of the Audit and, therefore, the assessee could not file the appeal within the stipulated time. In view of the above, ld. ITA No.1928/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3 . AR submitted that there is no fault of the assessee in filing the appeal belatedly and, therefore, the same should be condoned. 3. On the other hand, considering the length of delay, the ld. DR left the issue on the discretion of the Bench. 4. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the length of delay and that too attributable to the Auditor and not to the assessee, we, therefore, are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. 5. On merit of the case, we note that the assessment has been framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 r.ws 144B of the Act after making the addition of Rs. 1,10,55,240/- and 43,36,000/- representing the cash deposit and cash withdrawal from the bank account during the year in dispute. However, we note that the assessee submitted the details to justify the source of cash deposit vide letter dated 9/5/2023, which has also been acknowledged by the AO. However, the submission of the assessee given vide letter dated 09/05/2023 were rejected by the AO. In this regard, we note that the AO rejected the submissions of the assessee without assigning any reason. In our considered view, the AO is under the obligation to pass a reasoned and speaking order before rejecting the claim of the assessee. 6. Likewise, the provisions of sec. 250(6) of the Act mandates to the ld. CIT(A) to pass reasoned order. However, we note that none of the authorities below has assigned any reason before rejecting the ITA No.1928/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 . submission made by the assessee vide letter dated 09/05/2023. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 25th day of November, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 25th November, 2024 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "