Shri Bholgamda Seva Sahkari Mandli Limited, Rajkot V. The DCIT (CPC), Bangalore, Bangaluru

ITA 287/RJT/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8704 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY
• Section: 6; 143(1); 80P; 139(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I .T .A . N o .2 8 7 /R j t /2 02 3 ( A s se ss m e nt Y e a r : 20 18- 1 9 ) Sh r i B h ol ga md a Se va Sa h k ar i Ma nd li Lt d . , C / o. Sa r d a & Sa r d a , C A s , 1 s t F lo or , “ S a ka r ” , D r. R a d ha k r is h n an R oa d , O p p. R aj k u m a r C o ll e g e, R a j ko t-3 6 00 01 V s. The D e p ut y C o m m i s si o n er of I n co me T ax , CP C, B a n g a lor e [ P A N N o. A A A A S2 38 3 R ] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR D a t e of H ea r i ng 31.01.2024 D a t e of P r o no u n ce me nt 15.02.2024 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 22.06.2023 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeals:- “1. The intimation order u/s. 143(1) of the Act is bad in law. 2. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on facts in disallowing the deduction of Rs. 6,38,540/- claimed u/s. 80P of the Act. 3. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal as non-maintainable without condoning the delay in filing the appel.” ITA No.287/Rjt/2023 Shri Bholgamda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 2 - 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society and is engaged in the business of trading of fertilizers amongst it’s members on a wholesale and retail basis. Further, the assessee also provides credit facilities to it’s members. The assessee filed return of income for the impugned assessment year on 18.10.2018 declaring income at Rs. NIL after claiming deduction of Rs. 6,38,541/- under Section 80P of the Act. Subsequently, CPC, Bangalore passed order under Section 143(1) dated 31.05.2019 by disallowing the claim of deduction under Section 80P on the ground that the return of the assessee was not filed within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) and therefore, the assessee’s claim of deduction was disallowed as per Section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. 4. As per the assessee, the order under Section 143(1) of the Act was sent to the email id of the consultant of the assessee who failed to communicate such order to the assessee in a timely manner and accordingly, there was delay in filing an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) of 220 days. 5. During the course of appellate proceedings before CIT(A) the assessee submitted that the return filed by the assessee society was within the time limit as per Section 139(1) of the Act since the assessee was liable for audit as per the Gujarat Co-operative Society Act, 1961 and therefore, the due date to file return of income was extended to 31.10.2018 by the CBDT for the impugned year under consideration. Therefore, it was submitted that since the assessee filed return of income on 18.10.2018, it was within the time limit prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act and therefore, the assessee was eligible to claim deduction under Section 80P of the Act. However, Ld. CIT(A) refused to condone the delay in filing of the ITA No.287/Rjt/2023 Shri Bholgamda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 3 - appeal and dismissed the appeal of the assessee without adjudicating on the merits of the case. 6. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of the assessee on account of non-appearance. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a genuine and bona fide reason for non-filing of appeal within the prescribed limit before Ld. CIT(A) for the reason that email id on which the communication was made by the CPC, Bangalore belonged to the tax consultant of the assessee who failed to communicate such order to the assessee in a timely manner. It was submitted that the assessee was located at a small village and the staff members of the assessee did not have technical awareness of email and e-filing portal of the Income Tax Department. The assessee came to know about the demand from the Income Tax Officer and after taking appropriate legal advice, the assessee filed appeal on 21.02.2020 before National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), against the above order. There was a delay of 220 days in filing the appeal however, it was submitted that the delay was unintentional and it had occurred due to reasons and circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, it was further submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and it was submitted before us since the assessee had filed it’s return of income within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act and hence no disallowance is called for under Section 80P of the Act in the instant set of facts. Accordingly, it was requested that in the interest of justice, the issue may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present it’s case on merits. ITA No.287/Rjt/2023 Shri Bholgamda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4 - 7. In our considered view, on going through the facts of the instant case, the assessee has a genuine and bona fide reason for not being able to file appeal before Ld. CIT(A) within the prescribed time limit. Accordingly, looking into the facts of the instant case, in the interest of justice, we hereby direct the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing of appeal before him and to hear the matter afresh on merits, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 15/02/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 15/02/2024 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील!य अ धकरण, राजोकट / DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. गाड' फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, राजोकट / ITAT, Rajkot 1. Date of dictation 13&14.02.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 13&14.02.2024 3. Other Member..................... 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S 14.02.2024 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .02.2024 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 15.02.2024 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 15.02.2024 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk.......................................... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order.......................... 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order..........................................