- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM . / ITA NO. 1236 /P U N/201 8 / ASSESS MENT YEAR : 20 1 4 - 1 5 SHREELAXMI MAHILA NAGRI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LTD., KILLA BHAG, A/P MANGALWEDHA, TAL MANGALWEDHA, DIST. SOLAPUR 413305 . / APPELLANT PAN: AA ABS1178B VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 1 , P ANDHARPUR . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.N. PURANIK / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI M.K. VERMA / DATE OF HEARING : 1 6 . 0 1 .201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08 . 0 2 .201 9 / ORDER PER S USHMA CHOWLA, J M : TH E APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) - 7 , PUNE , DATED 17 . 0 4 .20 1 8 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 4 - 1 5 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 14 3(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RA ISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN TREATING THE APPEAL NON - EST, ALLEGING NOT EXPLAINING THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL. IN FACT THERE IS NO DELAY, AS ASSESSING OFFICERS REPORT TO CIT(A) IS WRONG. ITA NO. 1236 /P U N/20 1 8 2 2. COMMISSIONER (A PPEALS) HAS ERRED IN NOT DISCUSSING AND ALLOWING THE APPELLANTS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P FOR INTEREST RECEIVED RS.5,42,379/ - ON FD WITH NATIONALIZED BANK, THOUGH ISSUE IS COVERED BY PUNE ITAT DECISION IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. 3. APPELLANT PRAYS FOR THE L EVY OF COST TO ASSESSING OFFICER FOR WRONG REPORTING DATE OF SERVICE OF ORDER. 3. THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL LATE BEFORE HIM. THE CIT(A) VIDE PARA 4 NOTES THAT ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 30.06.2016 AND DEMAND NOTICE WAS SERVED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 30.0 6 .2016; SO APPEAL FILED ON 09.08.2016 WAS OUT OF TIME. THE CIT(A) FURTHER NOTES THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ITNS - 51 RECEIVED ON 05.09.2017 HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE APPEAL WAS OUT OF TIME. THE CIT(A) FURTHER NOTES THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO GIVE ANY REASON FOR SUBMITTING THE APPEAL LATE AND HENCE, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . 4. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST ORDER OF CIT(A) AND HAS POINTED OUT THAT IN THE RE MAND REPORT IT IS VERY CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT NOTICE OF DEMAND WAS SERVED ON 30.06.2016. HOWEVER, DATE OF SERVICE OF DEMAND NOTICE WAS 22.07.2016. THIS POSITION WAS BROUGHT TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF CIT(A). IN SUPPORT THEREOF, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE OF POSTAL DEPARTMENT, WHICH CLEARLY REFLECTS THE SERVICE ON 22.07.2016. IT MAY BE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 30.06.2016 AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE SERVED ON THE SAME DATE. THUS, IN VIE W OF EVIDENCE FILED BY ASSESSEE OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE, WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THE SERVICE OF NOTICE ON 22.07.2016 AND WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL ON 09.08.2016 BEFORE THE CIT(A), THEN THE SAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED VERY MUCH IN TIME. IN VIEW THEREOF , I DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ITA NO. 1236 /P U N/20 1 8 3 AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE THUS , ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF FEBR UARY , 201 9 . SD/ - (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUN E ; DATED : 8 TH FEBR UARY , 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. PRIVA TE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE