M/s Aryanad Service Co-op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum V. ITO WARD 2(3), Trivandrum

ITA 20/COCH/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Aryanad Service Cooperative Bank Limited appealing against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which dismissed its appeal regarding the processing of its income tax return for the assessment year 2019-2020. The primary contention revolves around the adjustments made during the return processing under section 143(1)(a)(i) and 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, which the assessee argued were not properly addressed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered these specific adjustments in his decision and thus remanded the case back for a detailed examination of these issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 115448 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAJIT K. DAS
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, AM &ShriManomohan Das, JM IT A N o .20/Co ch/2 023: Ass t.Y ear:2 0 1 9-202 0 A rya na d Serv ice C o-o p erative B ank Lim ited , No . 593 , B ank Bui ld ing, Aryana nd Tr iva nd rum – 6 95 54 2 . [PAN: AAAAA9521F] vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(3), Trivandrum. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri. Arun Raj, Adv. Respondent by:Sri. Sajit K. Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 11.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order dated 15.11.2022 by NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ for short], dismissing the assessee’s appeal contesting the processing of it’s return of income for assessment year (AY) 2019-2020 vide Intimation dated 17.06.2020. 2. Sri.Raj, the learned counsel for the assessee, was during hearing unable to explain us, in the absence of the return of income, the adjustment/s made on the processing of the assessee’s return, and which led it to appeal before the ld.CIT(A), i.e., the first appellate authority under the Act.He sought time for placing the same on record, and explain the adjustments which, since confirmed in first appeal, are the subject matter of the instant appeal. It was at this stage found that there is no reference thereto, i.e., the said adjustment/s – despite the assessee raising it before him in its grounds of appeal (per Form 35), in the impugned order. The ld. CIT(A) had, instead, after condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him, and admitting it, proceeded to decide the appeal on the basis that it is an appeal against a regular assessment, delineating the scope and ambit of primary agricultural credit co- ITA No.20/Coch/2023 (AY 2019-2020) A r ya n a d S C B L t d . v . I T O 2 operative society (PACS), which the assessee claims itself to be, and on the basis of which it claims deduction u/s.80P(1) r/ws.80P(2)(a)(i). That is, de hors the ground/s raised before him for adjudication. The assessee has in fact been allowed the said deduction on processing u/s. 143(1), albeit at a lower amount, on account of adjustments u/ss.143(1)(a)(i) and 143(1)(a)(ii). 3. Under the circumstances, we only consider it proper to, vacating the said adjudication, set aside the matter for adjudication afresh, i.e., on merits, back to the file of the first appellate authority. The said authority shall confine itself to the grounds raised by the assessee before it, where and to the extent arising out of the Intimation dated 17/6/2020. The power of the first appellate authority, it is trite law, are co-terminus with that of the assessing authority, and would therefore extend to what the said authority could have done, i.e., under the proceedings initiated by the Revenue, unless the scope thereof stands enhanced by following the due process of law. What cannot be done directly, it is well settled, cannot be done indirectly. Where, however, the ld.CIT(A) is of the opinion that he could travel beyond the adjustment/s made under the Intimation under appeal, or the scope of the processing u/s.143(1)(a), he shall first, upon allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, which was not so in the first instance, do so by rendering his legal findings, conveying thus the legal basis of, or that which informs, his order. That is, this issue, despite our observations expressing our prima facie opinion, which may not be regarded as our final adjudication in the matter, is left open. We decide accordingly. 4. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on July 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 Sd/- (Manomohan Das) Sd/- (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Cochin; Dated: July 31, 2023 ITA No.20/Coch/2023 (AY 2019-2020) A r ya n a d S C B L t d . v . I T O 3 Devadas G* Copy to: 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals), Trivandrum. 4. The Pr. CIT concerned. 5. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin. 6. Guard File. Assistant Registrar ITAT/Cochin