HINDUSTAN LATEX EMPLOYEES MULTIPURPOSE SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMIT,BELAGAVI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

ITA 21/PAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Hindustan Latex Employees Multi Purpose Souhard Sahakari, a credit society, appealing against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and the CIT(A), which denied their claim for deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer initially denied the deduction after scrutiny, leading to an appeal that was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance by the assessee in responding to notices. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the assessee's circumstances for non-appearance and decided to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471242 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVINDRA HATTALLI..
• Assessee Lawyers: VEERANNA MURGOD
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 250; 80P

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos.21/PAN/2025 (A.Y.2020-21 ) Hindustan Latex Employees Multi Purpose Souhard Sahakari, NH4, P.B.Road, Kanagala Hukkeri, Belagavi-591225 Karnataka. Vs . I.T.O Ward-1, CTS No 2982, 2nd Floor, Bafna Towers, Raviwar Peth, Gokak-591307, District Belagavi, Karnataka. PAN .No.AAAAH0544D (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Veeranna Murgod.AR Revenue by Shri.Ravindra Hattalli..Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 20.03.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 21.03.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/sec143(3) and U/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of theNFAC/ CIT(A) sustaining the denial of claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act. 2 ITA. No. 21/PAN/2025 Hindustan Latex Employees Multipurpose Souhard sahakari Niyamit. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a credit society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members and has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2020-21 on 15.12.2021 disclosing a total income of Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/sec 80P of the Act. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under the CASS and notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued calling for details in respect of claims and the information supporting the return of income filed and there was partial response. Whereas the A.O find that the assessee society is not eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and dealt on the provisions and denied the claim of deduction u/sec80P(2)(d) of the act of Rs.3,45,375/-and finally assessed the total income of Rs.3,45,375/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 20.09.2022. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assesse to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing 3 ITA. No. 21/PAN/2025 Hindustan Latex Employees Multipurpose Souhard sahakari Niyamit. officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. Further the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no compliance nor appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assesse is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and passed the ex parte order. The CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing on various dates referred at Page 2 Para 1.1 of the order and there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assesse has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition made by the A.O and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) 4 ITA. No. 21/PAN/2025 Hindustan Latex Employees Multipurpose Souhard sahakari Niyamit. to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the Appeal. And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assesse for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 21.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 21/03/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji 5 ITA. No. 21/PAN/2025 Hindustan Latex Employees Multipurpose Souhard sahakari Niyamit. Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed "