NASALAPUR MAHILA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,RAIBAG V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, BELAGAVI

ITA 185/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, a cooperative credit society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, made by the Assessing Officer (A.O). The A.O had added unexplained cash credits to the assessee's income, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee contested that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the A.O's action without considering the facts and submissions adequately. The ITAT admitted additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT rules, which was not previously examined by the lower authorities, and decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706027 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIJULA UNIYAL.
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN CHOUGLE
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos.185/PAN/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Nasalapur, Chikodi, Belgaum-591213, Karnataka. Vs . I.T.O Ward-4, Civil Hospital Road, Belgaum-590001. Karnataka. . PAN .No. AACAN5745N (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Chetan Chougle.AR Revenue by Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 01.07.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 02.07.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the NFAC Delhi/CIT(A) passed u/sec 143(3) and u/sec 250 of the Act.. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 41 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed the application for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, we condone the delay 2 ITA. No.185/PAN/2024 Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. and admit the appeal. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition u/se 68 of the Act made by the Assessing Officer. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a cooperative credit society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. The assesse has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2017-18 on 26.08.2017 disclosing a total income of Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/sec 80P of the Act. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/sec143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act are issued calling for details in respect of claims and the information supporting the return of income filed. The assesse has filed the details and the Assessing Officer (A.O) has dealt on the submissions/details and find that there are cash deposits during the F.Y.2016-17 and the assessee was asked to explain the sources of deposits. Whereas the assesee has filed the financial statements and supporting information in respect of deposits along with bank statement and members list. The A.O. was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions of section 68 of the Act and made addition of unexplained cash credits and assessed the total income of Rs.48,16,818/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2019. 3 ITA. No.185/PAN/2024 Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, findings of the AO and submissions of the assesse but has confirmed the action of the Assessing officer and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the A.O overlooking the facts and submissions of the assessee in the proceedings. Further the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and has filed an application for admission of the additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT rules and substantiated the submissions with paperbook. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the evidences were not examined by the lower authorities and the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made u/sec68 of the Act as the transactions are not supported with the documentary evidences. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assesse has submitted the details as called for by the authorities. The assessee is filling the application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 29 of ITAT rules with details of cash transactions and KYC details of 4 ITA. No.185/PAN/2024 Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. members in respect of cash deposits which could not be submitted before the lower authorities. Further the evidences play a important role in decision making in the adjudicating proceedings. Therefore considering the facts, circumstances and additional evidences, the assessee should not suffer for non filing of material information, as the evidences play a vital role in decision making and we admit the additional evidence. Accordingly, to meet the ends of justice, we restore the disputed issues along with the additional evidence to the file of the CIT(A) to verify and adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 02.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 02/07/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 5 ITA. No.185/PAN/2024 Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji 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 "