PARASAGAD TALUKA PRATHAMIK SHIKSHAKARA PARASPARA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMIT,SOUNDATTI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BELAGAVI

ITA 15/PAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Parasagad Taluka Prathimik Shikshakara Paraspara Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, a Co-Operative Credit Society, which appealed against the orders of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Belagavi, concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The society had filed its return declaring a nil income after claiming a deduction under section 80P(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was denied due to the society's failure to provide registration under the Karnataka State Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Consequently, a penalty was imposed under section 270A of the Act for tax evasion. The tribunal heard the appeals together due to their interrelated facts and issues and decided to remit the cases back to the NFAC for a fresh examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40509 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs KSP Shanmugavel Nadai Ors [1985, 153 ITR 596 (Mad)]
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVINDRA HATTALLI LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: VEERANNA MURGOD LD.
• Keywords: Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 143(3); 143(2); 250; 143(1); 153; 10; 246A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 4 BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 014 & 015/PAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Parasagad Taluka Prathamik Shikshakara Paraspara Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Saundatti, Belagavi. PAN:AAAAP1358B . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Belagavi. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Mr Veeranna Murgod [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 20/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21/03/2025 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; This twin appeals are instituted by the assessee against respective orders passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short ‘Ld. NFAC’] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] relating to assessment year 2020-21. ITA No.014 & 015/PAN/2025 AY:2020-21 ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 2. Since the facts & issue arising out of the both these appeals are interrelated, upon rival party’s request and for the sake of brevity these appeals taken up together for hearing for being disposed-off by a consolidated order. 3. These appeals are time barred by 89 days. From the reasons stated in the affidavit we are of the considered view that, the assessee for a sufficient reasons was prevented from filing these twin appeals within the prescribed limit terms of section 253(3) of the Act. Consequently, applying the test laid in ‘CIT Vs KSP Shanmugavel Nadai Ors’ [1985, 153 ITR 596 (Mad)] we condone the aforestated delay and admit the same for adjudication on merit ITA No. 014/PAN/2025 4. The long and short of the quantum appeal is that; the assessee is a Co-Operative Credit Society registered u/s 10 of the Bombay Act State, 1925. For the year under consideration the assessee filed its return of income ['ITR' hereafter] on 29/12/2020 declaring total income of ₹NIL/- after claiming ₹82,11,331/- as deduction u/s 80P(2) of the Act. The said return in first placed ITA No.014 & 015/PAN/2025 AY:2020-21 ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 4 was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and later selected for scrutiny vide notice dt. 29/06/2021 u/s 143(2) of the Act. In the event of assessee’s failure to adduce the copy of registration as a ‘Co- Operative’ Society, under the provisions of Karnataka State Co- operative Societies Act 1959, the Ld. AO held the assessee as ineligible for 80P(2) deduction and thus denied the claim for deduction and assessed the total income accordingly u/s 143(3) of the Act. ITA No. 015/PAN/2025 5. Pursuant to aforestated assessment a consequential penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act were initiated and in the event of assessee’s effective failure to refute the negative findings/conclusion, the Ld. AO culminated the proceedings by imposing a penalty equal to 200% of tax sought to be evaded under s/s (9) of section 270A of the Act. 6. Aggrieved assessee unsuccessfully aforestated orders separately u/s 246A of the Act. Thus, hurt by the orders of tax authorities below, the assessee society came in present appeals. ITA No.014 & 015/PAN/2025 AY:2020-21 ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 4 7. We have heard the rival party’s submission on the limited issue of fitness of these cases for their remand to the file of Ld. NFAC and perused the material placed on records. We note that, the reasons which prevented the appellant from filing these appeals within the prescribed time limit had also prevented the appellant from prosecuting the appeals before the Ld. NFAC. Since the sufficiency of such reasons is already established, we therefore deem it fit to accord one more opportunity to the appellant to represent these cases on merits before the Ld. NFAC which can only be possible on their remand. In the event, without offering our comments on merits, we set-aside both the ex-parte impugned orders and remit them to Ld. NFAC for de-novo adjudication in accordance with law. 8. In result, these appeals are ALLOWED for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court the date mentioned hereinbefore. -S/d- -S/d- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji, 21th March, 2025. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The AO Concerned 4. PCIT Concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File By Order, Sr. Private Secretary / AR ITAT, Panaji. "