JAI HANUMAN MULTIPURPOSE SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD,BELGAUM V. ITO, WARD -1, GOKAK

ITA 334/PAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh Sahakari Limited, a cooperative credit society, appealing against the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) which sustained the addition of unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) had made these additions following substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank account during the financial year 2012-13, for which the assessee did not file a return. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to a 335-day delay in filing without sufficient cause. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the circumstances beyond the assessee's control that led to the delay and provided an opportunity for the assessee to explain the delay adequately.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 846856 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Panaji
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIJULA UNIYAL.
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD Y VAIDYA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER &SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No.334/PAN/2025 (A.Y.2013-14) Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh Sahakari Limited, Hukkeri, Belgaum-590001, Karnataka. Vs . National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi-110003. PAN No. AABAJ3969M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.AR Revenue by Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 23.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 25.03.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/sec147 r.w.s144 and U/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filling the appeal and sustaining the addition u/sec69A of the Act by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a cooperative credit society registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act 1997 and is engaged in activities of providing credit facilities to its members. The Assessing Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA. No.334/PAN/2025 Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh sahakari Limited. Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA NMS portal found that the assessee has made substantial cash deposits in the bank account maintained with the M/s Hukkeri Urban Cooperative Bank Limited in the F.Y.2012-13 and the assessee has not filed the return of income for the impugned assessment year 2013-14.The Assessing officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. Further notice u/sec143 (2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act are issued to substantiate the sources of cash deposits. Since, no explanations/details were filed, the AO considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of Sec.144 of the Act and made addition of unexplained cash deposits u/sec69A of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.1,05,68,000/- and passed the order u/sec147r.w.s 144 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 11.05.2023. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A),whereas the CIT(A) find that there is a delay of 335 days in filling the appeal and the assessee has not filed/ explained the sufficient reasonable cause for the delay and the CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee appeal in limine. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has not considered the facts that the assessee has received the A.O order and has filed the appeal before Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA. No.334/PAN/2025 Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh sahakari Limited. appellate authorities and the delay was not a wanton act but the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Further the Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has good case on merits and prayed for an opportunity to substantiate with the material evidences before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no proper compliance by the assesse in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the delay in filling the appeal was not explained with the reasonable cause and the appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition u/sec69A of the Act made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for no proper compliance. Whereas the affidavit and application U/sec 249(3) of the Act for condonation of delay of in filling the appeal was not filed before the CIT(A) by the assessee. Hence, we considering the facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity to the assessee to file the application/ affidavit for condonation of delay before the CIT(A) explaining the sufficient and reasonable cause and the CIT(A) should fallow a pragmatic approach for condonation of delay and in accordance with the provisions of law. Accordingly, We set Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA. No.334/PAN/2025 Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh sahakari Limited. aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate the delay condonation and deal the matter afresh in accordance with the law. The assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25.03.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 25/03/2026 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA. No.334/PAN/2025 Jai Hanuman Multipurpose Souhardh sahakari Limited. Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed Printed from counselvise.com "