Yalimunnoli Prathamik Krishi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Belgavi V. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 66/PAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8548 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ पणजी म ें । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.66/PAN/2018 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Yalimunnoli Prathamik Krishi, Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Yalimunnoli, Tal.-Kukkeri, Dist.-Belagavi-591309 PAN : AAAAY0338A .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru ......प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Chetan Chougule Revenue by : Shri Sourabh Nayak स ु नवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 12-11-2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 15-11-2021 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 30-11-2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gulbarga [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15. 2 ITA No. 66/PAN/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 2. The ld. AR submits that the assessee filed return of income the CPC, Bangalore determined the total income at Rs.2,46,975/- vide its intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act, against which the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). He argued that the CIT(A) basing on written submissions and without giving reasonable opportunity decided the appeal ex-parte of assessee. He contended that the assessee is a Co-operative Society and is entitled to claim deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. In this regard, there was no opportunity for the assessee to furnish the details regarding its claim u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. He sought to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) to decide the issue by verifying relevant evidence involving the claim u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that once the appeal is decided as per material available on record, there was no need for the assessee to again go back to the ld. CIT(A) and reasonable opportunity was already given by the ld. CIT(A). 4. After hearing both the parties, we note that as it rightly pointed by the ld. AR there was no evidence before the CIT(A) in terms of claim u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The CIT(A) also disposed of grounds raised by the assessee only in terms of intimation issued by the CPC, Bangalore in this respect. Since, there was no evidence on record in support of claim, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for its fresh consideration to decide the issue, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 3 ITA No. 66/PAN/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15 th November, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩ ु णे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 15 th November, 2021. RK आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Gulbarga 4. The Pr. CIT, Belgavi 5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩणजी, / DR, ITAT, Panaji. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशान ु सार / BY ORDER, तनजी सधिव / Private Secretary, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩ ु णे / ITAT, Pune