CHAKAN GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE V. ITO WARD 8(3), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 14/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Chakan Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Pathsanstha Maryadit, a cooperative society, appealing against the order of the CIT(A), which had dismissed their appeal in limine due to a delay of 154 days in filing. The primary issues pertained to the disallowance of deductions under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to interest income from investments with cooperative banks. The Tribunal noted the procedural error in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits and the reasons for the delay provided by the assessee, which were attributed to the negligence of their tax consultant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716387 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2025
• Other Referred Cases: MES employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., ITA No 2531/PUN/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD SHINGTE
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice; Audit objection; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \" ए \" ।येंयपीण प णी या न् IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"A\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं / ITA No.14/PUN/2025 धििेंारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Chakan Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Oppo. Chakan Market Yard, Chakan, Khed, Pune-410501 Maharashtra PAN-AAATC4916H Vs. ITO Ward 8(3), Pune अपीलेंर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: CA Pramod Shingte Department by: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing: 07-08-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 21-08-2025 आदीश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 28.11.2024 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for A.Y. 2015-16 which is arising out of Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 29.03.2024 framed by Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Offer erred in rejecting deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) for a sum of Re: 1,17,61,110/- being part of the book profit of appetent society without appreciating Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.14/PUN/2025 the fact that earning of interest is an integral part of society's business and appellant prays for allowing such deduction 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer erred in treating the interest received from investment a sum of Rs. 1,30,67,971/-, as income from other sources by rejecting appellants contention that said interest income is integral part of business activity and your appellant prays for cancellation of Assessing officer's action 3. Without prejudice to above ground on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer in not allowing the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) on interest income received from other co-operative society. Your appellants pray for allowing the same 4. Without prejudice to above ground, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law Learned Assessing Officer erred in treating entire interest income as interest income received from other co-operative society or bank without allowing deduction on account of interest/administrative 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 natural justice. 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in Limine by not condoning the delay of 154 days in filing of the appeal. Reasons for delay have been stated in the affidavit and the same is on account of Tax Consultant handling the work of assessment proceedings who did not responded to the notices nor he intimated the society about passing of such orders. He further prayed that the delay may please be condoned and also said that major issue is disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act for the income interest earned from investment with Co-operative Banks. Reference also made to the Paper Book running into 14 pages alongwith placing reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of MES employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., ITA No 2531/PUN/2024. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.14/PUN/2025 4. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders of Ld. CIT(A) but raised no objection if matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessee is a Co-operative Society and income of Rs. 21,160/- declared in the income filed for A.Y. 2015-16 on 21.09.2015. Case selected for limited scrutiny followed by Assessment Proceedings framed u/s 143(3) on 31.03.2017 assessing income at Rs. 1,64,063/- Thereafter based on audit objection the assessee has been subjected to reassessment proceedings and deduction u/s 80P of the Act has been disallowed and income assessed at Rs. 1,17,61,110/- The assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but with a delay of 154 days and Ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied with the reasons giving rise to the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. 6. Before us Ld. Counsel for the assessee with the support of affidavit has provided the reasons giving rise for delay in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and which is mainly on account of non communication by the Tax Consultant looking after the assessment work. Considering the facts of the case and also placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) (Supreme Court) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382) and taking a liberal and justice oriented approach we condone the delay of 154 days in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.14/PUN/2025 7. Further so far as grounds of appeal raised in the case are concerned we notice that the assessee has also raised grounds challenging the validity of the Notice issued u/s 148 of the Act as well as the validity of reassessment proceedings. Assessee has also raised the grounds against denial of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The assessee has stated that income from investment held with Co-operative Banks are eligible u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and a consistent view has been taken by this Tribunal. 8. We however note that firstly Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt on the merits of the case and secondly in the Profit and Loss account the interest is claimed to be received on Bank investment but there is no bifurcation as to whether the investment are with Nationalised Banks and Co-operative Banks or both. The assessee has also received interest on loans at Rs. 2,14,59,079.28. Under these given facts and circumstances, and in the larger interest of justice we provide one more opportunity to the assessee and restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to deal with all the issues raised in the instant appeal and decide in accordance with law and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.14/PUN/2025 9. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day of 21st August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER प णी/ Pune; ददिेंंक /Dated: 21st August, 2025. Neeta आदीश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रीधर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1 . अपीलेंर्थी / The Appellant. 2 . प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3 . The Pr. CIT concerned. 4 . धवभेंगीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"A\" बाच, प णी / DR, ITAT, \"A\" Bench, Pune. 5 . गेंर्ा फेंइल / Guard File. आदीशेंि सेंर / BY ORDER, Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, प णी /ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "