Primary Agricultural Credit Co Society , Chikkmagaluru V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikkmagalur

ITA 446/BANG/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The appeal was initially delayed due to the non-receipt of the ex parte order by the assessee, which was later condoned by the Tribunal based on the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others. The primary contention in the appeal was the denial of deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, which the assessee claimed was unjustly disallowed by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(Appeals) without proper examination of the merits, as the assessee did not receive the notices to which it could respond.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 124211 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETHAN CHOUGALE; POSTMAIL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 80P; 191

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC “A” BENCH : BANGALORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 446/Bang/2023 Assessment year : 2015-16 Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society, Town Panchayat Road, A/P Ajjampura. Tal. Tarikere. Dist. Chikkmagaluru. PAN: AAAAV 2154R Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Chikkmagalur. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Chethan Chougale, CA Respondent by : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel. Date of hearing : 25.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1046067796(1) dated 28.9.2022 of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [NFAC], for the AY 2015-16. 2. There is a delay of 191 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay stating that the assessee society is in a village and CIT(Appeals) passed ITA No. 446/Bang/2023 Page 2 of 4 ex parte order which was not received by the assessee by post/mail and the assessee noticed only after receipt of demand notice from the department. Thus, there was a delay in fling the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. AR prayed for condonation of delay due to the above reasonable cause. After hearing both the parties, it is observed that there are sufficient reasons for the delay and following the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471, delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs.28,180. The gross total income consisted of income from house property of Rs.78,183, income from business & profession of Rs.14,11,865 totaling to Rs.14,90,048. The assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80P of Rs.14,61,865. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and statutory notices were issued to the assessee. 4. The AO passed assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act making certain additions. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) issued notices for submissions and documents for which the assessee did not respond. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) after considering the material on record dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the notices issued by the CIT(Appeals) was not received by the assessee and therefore it could not respond to the same. He submitted that the assessee is ITA No. 446/Bang/2023 Page 3 of 4 eligible for deduction u/s. 80P which was denied by the revenue authorities and the ld. CIT(Appeals) has not gone into the merits of the case. The ld. AR requested that the assessee may be granted an opportunity to represent its case before the CIT(Appeals) and stated that the assessee will comply with the appeal proceedings. 6. The ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the authorities provided several opportunities, but the assessee did not comply with the same and therefore objected to another opportunity to the assessee. 7. Considering the rival submissions it is noticed that the assessee is a co-operative society and claimed deductions under Chapter VIA in its return of income. The AO has disallowed the claim of deduction made by the assessee. The CIT(Appeals) has passed ex parte order confirming the assessment order. According to the ld. AR, no notice has been served on the assessee. I think it fit that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity of hearing. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh consideration, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce all relevant documents and make submissions in support of its claim in the proceedings and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournment for early disposal of the case and further directed to provide correct address/email id/telephone numbers for communication from the Income Tax Department . ITA No. 446/Bang/2023 Page 4 of 4 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on this 31 st day of July, 2023. Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bangalore, Dated, the 31 st July, 2023. / Desai S Murthy / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore.