Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300344 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
11 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
06-02-2023
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
PartlyAllowed
Bench Allotted
DB
Next Hearing Date
06-02-2023
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
27-02-2022
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Utkal Grameen Bank, Bolangir Club Para, Dist: Bolangir PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021 2012-13. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal of the assessee exparte. It was the submission that adequate IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.24/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Utkal Grameen Bank, Bolangir Club Para, Dist: Vs. ITO (TDS), Sambalpur PAN/GIR No.AAAJU 0253 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Date of Hearing : 7/02 Date of Pronouncement : 7/02 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld , NFAC, Delhi, dated 28.7.2021 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034491419(1) for the assessment year Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal of the assessee exparte. It was the submission that adequate Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO (TDS), Sambalpur Respondent) P.K.Mishra, AR S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR 2/2023 2/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 28.7.2021 in Appeal for the assessment year Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal of the assessee exparte. It was the submission that adequate ITA No.24/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page2 | 3 opportunity has not been granted to the assessee. It was the prayer that the order of the ld CIT(A) may be set aside and the issues may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for readjudication on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. It was the submission that the issue in the appeal was against non-deduction of TDS by the co- operative bank in respect of interest paid to its members. It was the submission that no TDS itself was liable to be deducted in respect of the co- operative bank till 1.6.2015. It was the prayer that the ld CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue on merits and if the Bench was not inclined to restore the issue to the file of the ld CIT(A), the Bench may please direct to delete the issue by holding that the TDS liability in respect of interest paid to the members of the cooperative bank is liable to be deducted only from 1.6.2015. It was the submission that the impugned assessment year is 2012-13. 4. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the assessee has not appeared before the ld CIT(A). He submitted that the issue may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for proper adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that in para 4.0, he has mentioned the issue of various notices to the assessee through email. It is noticed that the period during which the notices have been issued are substantially during the pandemic ITA No.24/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page3 | 3 period when the functioning of the various offices were eratic and many a times closed. This being so, without going to the merits of the addition, the order of the ld CIT(A) is set aside and the issues are restored to his file for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/02/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 07/02/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Utkal Grameen Bank, Bolangir Club Para, Dist: Bolangir 2. The Respondent: ITO (TDS), Sambalpur 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC , Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//
AI Insights
The case involves Utkal Grameen Bank appealing against the order of the CIT(A), which was adjudicated ex parte. The primary issue was the non-deduction of TDS by the cooperative bank on interest paid to its members for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee argued that TDS was not applicable on such payments until June 1, 2015. The CIT DR supported the restoration of the issue to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication. The Tribunal noted the disruptions caused by the pandemic, which affected the communication and functioning of offices, leading to the decision to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the matter for a fresh hearing.
