BARAMATI TALUKA SAHAKARI PHALUTPADAM SANGH,PUNE V. ITO WARD-14(5), PUNE

ITA 2103/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by Baramati Taluka Sahakari Phalutpadan Sangh against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2018-19. The appeals were related to the rejection of deductions under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the imposition of penalties. The Assessee argued that the lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte orders and in their interpretation of the law regarding deductions for interest income. The Tribunal noted that the Assessee had not received proper notice due to a change in PAN and had not been given a fair opportunity to present their case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787902 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.332/PUN/2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND RENGE VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD SHINGTE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Baramati Taluka SahakariPhalutpadan Sangh, At PipmaliAtPimpali Post Pimpali Taluka Baramati District Pune – 413102. Maharashtra. V s The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(5), Pune. PAN: AAATB5269Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by Shri Arvind Renge – Addl.CIT(Virtual) Date of hearing 04/11/2025 Date of pronouncement 24/11/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: These two appeals filed by the Assessee are against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2018-19 dated 25.07.2025 and 07.08.2025 respectively; against the order u/s.143(3) dated 05.03.2021 and penalty order u/s.270A of the Act, dated 09.08.2021 respectively.For the sake of convenience, Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 [A] 2 these two appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. We treat the appeal in ITA No.2104/PUN/2025 as lead case. The Assessee in ITA No.2104/PUN/2025 has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte order and erred in deciding the issue only on the basis of material available with them, this action is being violative of principal of natural justice. Your appellant prays for granting opportunity of hearing before lower authorities. Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, following grounds are also taken on merit, 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law learned AO erred in rejecting deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) for a sum of Rs. 12,47,360/-being part of book profit of appellant society without appreciating the fact that earning of interest is an integral part of society's business and appellant prays for allowing such deduction. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Learned Assessing officer erred in treating sum of Rs.7,521 and Rs. 12,39,839 being income from SB account and income from FD respectively received from other co-operative banks, as income from other sources without realizing the fact that earning of interest income is integral part of business activity of appellant society and therefore, appellant has rightly claimed deduction under section 80P and same shall be allowed. 4. Without prejudice to above ground on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law Learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) on interest income received from other co-operative society. Your appellants pray for allowing of the same. 5. Without prejudice to above ground, On the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law Learned Assessing Officer erred in treating entire interest income as interest income received from other co- Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 [A] 3 operative society or bank without allowing deduction on account of interest expenses. Your appellant prays for such deduction Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of principle of natural justice.” 1.1 The Assessee in ITA No.2103/PUN/2025 has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte order and erred in deciding the issue only on the basis of material available with them, this action is being violative of principal of natural justice. Your appellant prays for granting opportunity of hearing before lower authorities. Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, following grounds are also taken on merit, 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Learned Assessing officer erred in leaving the penalty of Rs.7,64,688/- by treating the disallowance of proportionate claim under section 80P as item of under-reporting and consequently misreporting without realizing the fact that, in the return of income your appellant has made bonafide claim which has been allowed to the assess in previous year therefore, appellant strongly believes that there is neither any under reporting income nor any misreporting of income and entire penalty needs to be dropped. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of principle of natural justice.” Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(Appeal) had Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 [A] 4 given six opportunities to the Assessee, but Assessee could not file details, therefore, ld.CIT(Appeal) upheld the assessment order. During the proceedings, ld.AR submitted that Assessee is a Co- operative Credit Society and eligible for deduction u/s.80P of the Act. However, Assessee had obtained a new PAN : AAJAB6297N on March-2022. Therefore, Assessee had not accessed the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) for PAN : AAATB5269Q, which was Assessee’s earlier PAN. Therefore, ld.Aurhtorised Representative(ld.AR) submitted that one more opportunity may kindly be provided to the Assessee. Ld.AR further submitted that in assessee’s own case for A.Y.2017-18, ITAT in ITA No.332/PUN/2022 had allowed the appeal of the assessee on the issue of eligibility of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Ld.AR further submitted that therefore ld.CIT(Appeal) should have allowed the appeal of the Assessee for A.Y..2018-19 even in the absence of any submission as ld.CIT(A) have access to earlier years assessee’s records. 3. It is observed that ld.CIT(Appeal) had dismissed the appeal of the Assessee, because assessee failed to file any details in reply to Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 [A] 5 notices. We are convinced that there was sufficient reason for non- compliance. 4. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order of ld.CIT(A) to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The ld.CIT(Appeal) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee shall file necessary documents before the ld.CIT(Appeal). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. ITA No.2103/PUN/2025 – Penalty Appeal : 6. Since we have set-aside the quantum addition to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in ITA No.2104/PUN/2024 above, therefore, ld.CIT(A) order dated 07.08.2025 emanating from penalty order dated 09.08.2021 is also set-aside to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The ld.CIT(Appeal) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee shall file necessary documents before the ld.CIT(Appeal). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2103 & 2104/PUN/2025 [A] 6 7. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 8. To sum up, both appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24 November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- VINAY BHAMORE Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पपणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 24 Nov, 2025/ SGR आदेशकीप्रनिनलनपअग्रेनषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपऩलधर्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. नवभधगऩयप्रनिनिनर्, आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, “एस एम सऩ” बेंच, पपणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गधर्ाफ़धइल / Guard File. आदेशधिपसधर / BY ORDER, / / TRUE COPY / / Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, पपणे/ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "