Gopalkrishna Patsanstha, Satara V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

ITA 986/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Gopalkrishna Patsanstha Gondawale Khrud, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issue was the eligibility of the assessee to claim a deduction under section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to discrepancies in the name and date of incorporation as per the registration certificate and PAN database. The CIT(A) had directed the AO to verify the correct date of registration from the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, which the Tribunal found to be an incorrect procedural approach. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s decision on the facts but corrected the procedural error by remanding the matter back to the AO for proper verification.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 124095 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपीऱ सं. /ITA No.986/PUN/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gopalkrishna Patsanstha Gondawale Khrud, Tal. Man, Dist. Satara, Gondawale – 415508 PAN : AAAAG2333B Vs. ITO, Ward 3, Satara Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 17-05-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called „the Act‟) in relation to the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act, which was allowed by the Assessing Officer (AO) by means of an order passed u/s 143(3). Due to some error in not dropping tax demand, the assessee was requested to make payment. In rectification proceedings, the AO took a stand that the name of assessee as per the Registration certificate Assessee by Mrs. J R Chandekar Revenue by Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing 23-10-2023 Date of pronouncement 23-10-2023 ITA No.986/PUN/2023 Gopalkrishna Patsanstha 2 issued by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, Dahiwadi, Tal. Man, Dist. Satara dated 22.03.1990 was “Gopalkrishna Panchkoshi Gramin Sahkari Patsanstha”, as against the name of the assessee in the PAN as “Gopalkrishna Patsanstha”. Some difference was also noticed in the date of incorporation. He, therefore, held the assessee to be disentitled to the claim u/s 80P. In the first appeal, ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee applied for the PAN with correct name. However, the name of assessee came to be entered in the changed manner at the time of issuance of PAN certificate. He thus held this aspect in favour of the assessee. Regarding the difference in the date as per the Registration document, being, 22.02.1990 and the date of incorporation mentioned in PAN data base as 20.02.1990, the ld. CIT(A) held that the correct date appears to have been mentioned. However, to resolve the controversy about the correct date of registration, he directed the AO to make proper enquiry and verification of the certificate of registration from the concerned officer of the Department i.e. the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, Dahiwadi, Tal. Man, Dist. Satara. The claim of the assessee was allowed subject to such verification. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. ITA No.986/PUN/2023 Gopalkrishna Patsanstha 3 3. I have heard both the sides and perused the record. It is seen that the ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee‟s contention of the eligibility to the deduction u/s 80P - both on account of difference in the name as per the Registration certificate and as per PAN data base; and also towards difference in the date. He, however, directed the AO to make enquiry and verification of the correct date of registration from the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, Dahiwadi, Tal. Man, Dist. Satara, for which purpose the matter was sent back. As per law, the ld. CIT(A) has no power to send the matter back to the file of the AO for verification. Whatever is required to be done, should be done by him alone and in case any further enquiry or verification, he is entitled to call for a remand report from the AO. He, however, cannot send the matter back to the AO for a fresh decision. Apart from this technically erroneous approach of the ld. CIT(A) in not getting a remand report from the AO but asking him to verify the same, the decision on the facts of the case, in principle, is correct. In the absence of a decision by the ld. CIT(A) without examining this factual aspect on this score, the Tribunal would have ordinarily remitted the matter to the AO for examining this aspect, which the ld. CIT(A) did. The crux of the matter is that though the decision of ld. CIT(A) in remitting the matter to the file of AO is not correct, but the line of thinking is correct. ITA No.986/PUN/2023 Gopalkrishna Patsanstha 4 Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside to this extent and the matter is remanded to the file of the AO for making proper verification and examination concerning the date of registration as appearing in the PAN data base and the registration certificate issued by the competent authority. Like countenance of entitlement of the assessee to deduction on difference in the name aspect for no fault of it, the deduction should be granted if similar position prevails on the date aspect also. Needless to say, an opportunity of hearing will be provided to the assessee in such fresh proceedings. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 23 rd October, 2023. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; ददिधंक Dated : 23 rd October, 2023 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, SMC, Pune / DR, ITAT, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune ITA No.986/PUN/2023 Gopalkrishna Patsanstha 5 Date 1. Draft dictated on 23-10-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 23-10-2023 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *