- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM . / ITA NO. 1234 /P U N/201 8 / ASSES SMENT YEAR : 20 14 - 15 SOLAPUR DISTRICT CO - OP. MILK PRODUCERS PROCESS UNION LTD., 24/1, MURARJI PETH, SOLAPUR 413001 . / APPELLANT PAN: A AUFS9294C VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 2, SOLAPUR . / RESPO NDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.S. SHINGTE / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI M.K. VERMA / DATE OF HEARING : 1 6 . 0 1 .201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 . 0 1 .201 9 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CH OWLA, J M : TH E APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) - 7 , PUNE , DATED 0 9 . 0 4 .20 1 8 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 14 - 15 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 14 3(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - ITA NO. 1234 /P U N/20 1 8 2 1 . ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX - PARTE, WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, THE ACT BEING IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL J USTICE, IT IS PRAYED THAT APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE RESTORED BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION BY LEARNED CIT(A). WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE GROUND FOLLOWING GROUND IS TAKEN ON MERIT; 2 . ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED ASSESSING O FFICER HAS ERRED IN DISALLOWING PROPORTION INTEREST EXPENSE PLUS RS.481.47 LACS, BY DISREGARDING APPELLANT'S CONTENTION IN THIS REGARD. ACTION BEING ARBITRARY AND PERVERSE, THEREFORE NEEDS TO BE REVERSED. 3 . ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER H AS ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(D) TO THE EXTENT OF RS.186.40 LACS THEREBY ARRIVING THE INCOME AT RS.16,78,630. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS FOR ALLOWANCE OF TOTAL DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) AND REST ORE THE INCOME AS RETURNED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX - PARTE WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY THE CIT(A) AND HENCE, THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL. HE F AIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING BUT A FAIR OPPORTUNITY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDERS OF TRIBUNAL I.E. INTEREST INCOME ARISING FROM CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. 4. THE PERUSAL OF APPELLATE ORDER REFLECTS THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON FOUR DATES OF HEARING AND THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON TWO OF THE DATES AND ON THE BALANCE DATES, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. HENCE, THERE WAS NON REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE CIT(A) . 5. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABO VE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WHERE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE ISSUE ITA NO. 1234 /P U N/20 1 8 3 STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE, IT IS DEEMED FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A), WHO SHALL AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE THUS, ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 9 . SD/ - (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DA TED : 25 TH JANUARY , 201 9 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 7 , PUNE ; 4 . THE PR. CIT - 6 , PUNE ; 5. 6. , , , - / DR SMC , ITAT, PUNE; / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE