BARHATTAKAR SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT RAIPUR,RAIPUR V. ITO-2, ITARSI, ITARSI

ITA 583/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Barhattakar Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Raipur, the appellant, contesting the orders of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer regarding the assessment year 2017-18. The appellant challenged the additions made to their income regarding variations in opening stock and unexplained money under sections 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The first appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A), leading to the current appeal. The tribunal found that the CIT(A) and AO had not adequately considered the appellant's submissions and circumstances, warranting a remand for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 834321 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORASSESSEESUBMITSTHATTHECIT A HASDECIDEDFIRSTAPPEAL; FORREVENUESUBMITSTHATHEDOESNOTHAVEANYOBJECTION; SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIN.D.PATWA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 4 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.583/Ind/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 Barhattakar Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Raipur, Hoshangabad बनाम/ Vs. ITO-2 Itarsi (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: AAAAB2073R Assessee by Shri N.D. Patwa, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 03.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1075173594(1) dated 28.03.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 11.05.2023 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: Printed from counselvise.com Barhattakar Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Raipur ITA No.583/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18 Page 2 of 4 “1.The Id CIT(A) was not justified in ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the appellant, without deciding the appeal on merits, and that a fair and meaningful opportunity was not available to the appellant to present his case. 2.The ld CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,26,378/- on account of variation in respect of opening stock without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The Id CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 62,72,767/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4.The appellant carves leave to add, amend OR modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 2. There is a small delay of 8 days in filing present appeal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of case and the averments made by appellant in the application/affidavit for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate. In view of the settled legal position laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387, wherein it has been held that the “technical considerations” should not prevail over the cause of “substantial justice”, we deem it fit to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 8 days in filing appeal is condoned and the appeal is taken for hearing. 3. Ld. AR for assessee submits that the CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee for the reason that the assessee did not make any submission before him despite opportunities given. He further submits that the CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order passed by AO and thereby upheld Printed from counselvise.com Barhattakar Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Raipur ITA No.583/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18 Page 3 of 4 the additions but the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first appeal requires an apt adjudication by CIT(A) on merit in accordance with provisions of 250(6) of the Act which provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. Ld. AR further submits that the assessment-order passed by AO is also a type of ex-parte wherein the AO has made additions for lack of details/documents. However, the assessee has subsequently collected all required details/documents and is ready and willing to make an effective representation before AO if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication. 4. Ld. DR for revenue submits that he does not have any objection against remand but his request is to direct the assessee to represent case before AO without seeking unnecessary adjournments. Further, he requested the bench to impose a reasonable cost upon assessee. 5. In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of AO, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk and responsibility of assessee and subject to a cost of Rs. 2,500/- to be paid by assessee to Prime Minister National Relief Fund. The assessee shall submit a receipt of such payment to AO during proceedings. The AO shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an Printed from counselvise.com Barhattakar Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Raipur ITA No.583/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18 Page 4 of 4 appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 6. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, subject to payment of cost by assessee as mentioned above. Order pronounced in open court on 03/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 03/02/2026 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "