M/S GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, Dhamtari(C.G) V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, Dhamtari(C.G)

ITA 96/BIL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2584 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.94/RPR/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, VILL.- BORSI, MAGARLOAD, DISTT- DHAMTARI (CG). VS. ITO- 1(3), DHAMTARI (CG). PAN : AAAAG9736C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.95/RPR/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, VILL.- SIWNIKALA, DISTT- DHAMTARI (CG). VS. ITO, DHAMTARI (CG). PAN : AAAAG9879L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.96/RPR/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, VILL.- KOKADI, TEH.- KURUD, DISTT- DHAMTARI (CG). VS. ITO, DHAMTARI (CG). PAN : AAAAG9963F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL, CA MS. LAXMI SHARMA, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI SANJAY KUMAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 17-08-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17-08-2018 O R D E R PER BENCH : THE ABOVE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASS ESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)- 1, R AIPUR (CG) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. SINCE IDENTICAL GROUNDS H AVE BEEN RAISED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES IN THEIR APPEALS CHALLENGING T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DISMISSING THE APPEALS FIELD BY THEM, THEREFORE, TH ESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT ALL THE AB OVE ASSESSEES ARE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND ARE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKIN G ACTIVITIES FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE MEMBERS ONLY ALONG WITH SOME OTHER BUSIN ESS ACTIVITIES LIKE :- (A) TRADING OF FERTILIZERS, PESTICIDES & SEED. (B) PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN INCLUDES SUGAR, R ICE, WHEAT AND KEROSENE. (C) PADDY PROCUREMENT BUSINESS AS COMMISSION AGENT. 3. ALL THE ABOVE ASSESSEES FILED THEIR RESPECTIVE R ETURNS OF INCOME DECLARING NIL INCOME AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80-P OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. IN THE 3 ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80-P AND AFTER MAKING CERTAIN DISALLOWANCES DETERMI NED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.6,73,972/- IN THE CASE OF GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI S AMITI MARYADIT, BORSI, RS.5,23,217/- IN THE CASE OF GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI S AMITI MARYADIT, SIWNIKALA, AND RS.4,72,015/- IN THE CASE OF GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKA RI SAMITI MARYADIT, KOKADI. 4. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEALS FILED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE ARE IN APPEAL BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRING TO TH E APPELLATE ORDER IN ITA NO.95 & 96/RPR/2016 SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) M ENTIONS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED SUBMISSION DATED 04.02.2016 AND NONE APPE ARED ON THE VARIOUS DATES WHEN THE APPEALS WERE FIXED. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE INSTANT CASE HAS NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO F ILED CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 29 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 WHICH CONTAIN A COMPILATION OF PERCENTAGE OF PADDY PROCURED FROM MEMBERS AND NON-MEMBERS. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BE ADMITTED AND THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORE D EITHER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR THE LD. CIT(A) AS THE BENCH DE EMS IT PROPER. 4 6. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND STRONGLY OPPOSED TH E SUBMISSION AS ADVANCED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HE S UBMITTED THAT THE APPEALS WERE FIXED BY ISSUE OF NOTICE. THE AR OF THE ASSES SEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ON THE BASIS OF SUBMISSION MADE BY T HE ASSESSEE THE APPEALS WERE DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A). SINCE THE LD. CIT( A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERIT, THEREFORE, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE SH OULD BE DISMISSED AND THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE UPHELD. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS TH E SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TH E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, WHICH GO TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER, SHOULD BE ADMITTED. FUR THER, IT IS ALSO HIS SUBMISSION THAT THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT(A) PROPERLY. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO GRANT ONE FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO THE R ESPECTIVE ASSESSEES TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CASES. THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL DEC IDE THE ISSUE AS PER FACT AND LAW AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE RESP ECTIVE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ABOVE APPEALS OF THE RESPECTI VE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF I.E. ON THIS 17 TH AUGUST, 2018. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17-08-2018. SUJEET COPY OF ORDER TO: - 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT 4) THE CIT(A) 5) THE DR, I.T.A.T., RAIPUR. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, RAIPUR