PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED,CHIKMAGLUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , CHIKMAGALUR

ITA 2027/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited, which filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, due to a delay in filing. The original assessment by the National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2018-19, added Rs. 1,36,26,452 as agricultural income, which the Assessee failed to substantiate. The CIT(A) did not admit the appeal due to the delay, which the Assessee attributed to lack of awareness and guidance on tax matters, discovered only during a subsequent audit. The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the delay, admitted the appeal, and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a detailed examination of the agricultural income claimed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833821 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUBRMANIAN
• Assessee Lawyers: NARENDRA SHARMA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited, No. 7, Agrahara Main Road, N R Pura, Chikmaglur, Karnataka – 577 134. PAN: AADAP1244R Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmagalur. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Subrmanian – JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06-02-2026 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT 1. ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 is filed by M/s. Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited for Assessment Year 2018-19 against the Appellate Order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi on 08.03.2025 wherein the Appeal filed by the Assessee against the Assessment Order passed by the National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi on 03.02.2021 u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax, Act 1961 was not admitted as there was a delay in filing of the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Assessment Order dated 03.02.2021 was received by the Assessee on 08.02.2021 whereas the Appeal was instituted on 01.06.2023 and therefore there was a delay in filing of the Appeal. In Form No. 35, the Assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing ofappeal as Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 6 per column no. 14, in column no. 15, the Assessee explained the reason for delay. The Ld. CIT(A) stated that Assessee was given an opportunity on 08.03.2025 to explain the delay. However, Assessee did not submit any cogent, tangible evidence for delay and therefore the Appeal was not admitted. 2. Therefore, the Assessee is in appeal before us. 3. The brief fact of the case shows that Assessee is a Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 18.10.2018 declaring a total loss of Rs. 1,32,59,0007/- and agricultural income of Rs. 1,36,26,452/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny for verification of large agricultural income. The notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued. By issue of various notices, the Assessee was asked to submit the complete details of the agricultural income, its nature, type and measurement of land, ownership of land, crop grown, village, Tehsil etc., The Assessee was issued several notices but did not reply and therefore the addition was made of the above sum of Rs. 1,36,26,452/- which is wrongly claimed as agricultural income. The Assessment Order was passed on 03.02.2021. 4. The Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 01.06.2023. Admittedly, the Appeal was delayed as stated by the Assessee in column no. 14 of Form No. 35. The Assessee has submitted the reason which is stated to be by the Chartered Accountant as under: - Dear Sir, With due respect I want to say that my client PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED has been assessed to income tax by National e-Assessment Center for the assessment year 2018-19 and thereby received the order of assessment along with a demand notice. Being aggrieved by this assessment order my client wants to go in appeal. The prescribed date for filing appeal has, however, expired. As per the instructions of my client, I am submitting the reasons for which the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time limit. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 6 The assessing officer has passed order under section 143(3), my client is a agricultural cooperative society and basically from a small village and they have no knowledge of income tax filings and further process of income tax filing and society income tax consultant not guided properly and they have no knowledge of even how to open the income tax portal to check and replay, now when we started audit we came to know about the demand for the AY 2018-19. In view of the above factit is clear that the delay in submission of the appeal is due to good and sufficient reason, therefore, the same should be condoned. I hope your honourwould be kind enough to condone the delay and entertain my client’s appeal on merits. Thanking you Yours truly Devraj B.V. Chartered Accountant 5. On perusal of the reason, it is apparent that the Assessee stated that they are not aware about the proceedings as they are coming from a small village and it came to their notice when the audit was conducted for subsequent year that there is an outstanding amount. This appeal was not admitted by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) held that there is no sufficient cause. 6. The appeal filed before us is also late by 108 days. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was received on 08.03.2025. But the Appeal was filed on 16.09.2025 thereby there is a delay of 108 days. The Assessee has applied for condonation of delay as well as submitted an affidavit. The reason stated by the Assessee was that there is no order of the Ld. CIT(A) which was served upon the Assessee physically and the Assessee came to know only when the audit for subsequent year was finalized. He further stated that the hearing notices have not been received on the email mentioned in Form No. 35. Hence, the Assessee is not aware of the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the notices issued by him. As the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) came to the notice of the Assessee only when the demand was Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 6 pressed, the counsel was contacted who advised them to file Appeal immediately along with the application for condonation of delay, which Assessee has done. The delay is unintentional and deserves to be condoned. The Ld. Authorized Representative reiterated the same facts for condonation of delay. It was submitted that non-receipt of the order at the email address given by the Assessee in Form No. 35 itself constitutes the reasonable cause for condonation of delay. 7. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Assessee did not cooperate before the Assessing Officer, before the Ld. CIT(A) and even before the ITAT. It did not submit any information. Therefore, it does not deserve any leniency for condonation of delay. 8. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and admittedly the Appeal is delayed by 108 days. On perusal of Form No. 35, we find that the Assessee mentioned the email address as [e-mail]. The claim of the Assessee that in the Form No. 35 they have mentioned that this order is received on 08.03.2025. But, same is not received on the email address given in Form No. 35. The Assessee came to know only when the demand is pressed. The revenue could not show us any evidence that the Appellate Order has been served on the Assessee at the email address given by the Assessee which is challenged by the Assessee. Therefore, we agree that in absence of any evidence produced by the revenue that order was served to the Assessee on 08.03.2025 at the given email id, we find that there is sufficient cause for delay in filing of the Appeal. Therefore, the Appeal is admitted. 9. On the merits of the case, we find that Assessment Order is passed making an addition of Rs. 1,36,26,452/- with respect to the agricultural income which was not complied by the Assessee at the stage of the Ld. Assessing Officer. Similarly, the Appeal is not admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) as there was a delay in filing the Appeal. 10. Now, we first come to the issue about the delay in filing of the Appeal before ld. CIT (A). In Form No. 35, the Assessee has submitted that Assessment Order was received by the Assessee on 08.02.2021. However, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Page 5 of 6 the Appeal was instituted on 01.06.2023. In Form No. 35 at column no. 14, the Assessee has admitted that there is delay in filing the Appeal. Further, at the paragraph no. 15, the Assessee has also given the reasons for delay in filing of the Appeal. The reason stated by the Chartered Accountant of the Assessee Mr. Devraj B V is that the Assessment Order was passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer. He submits that the Assessee is from a very small village and does not have any knowledge of income tax. It was further stated that Assessee even does not know how to open the income tax portal to check and reply. When the audit for Assessment Year 2018-19 was to be carried out he came to know about this Assessment Order and advised the Assessee to file the Appeal. Consequently, the Appeal was filed. No doubt, there is delay in filing of the Appeal. 11. The Ld. CIT(A) should have considered the above explanation and decide that whether there is a sufficient cause for delay in filing of the Appeal. Instead of doing this, the Ld. CIT(A) has stated that Assessee has not submitted any cogent, tenable evidence as reasons for delay in filing of appeal. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) should have stated that whether the reasons are sufficient or not. If he finds that the Assessee has not furnished any reason, then before admitting the Appeal or refusing to admit the Appeal at least he should have communicated with the Assessee that that there is no reasons shown by the Assessee as sufficient cause for delay in filing of the Appeal, an opportunity should have been granted. In fact, even if he does not want to grant an opportunity to the Assessee, he should have perused column no. 15 and then decided whether the delay in filing of the Appeal has sufficient cause or not. In the Appellate Order, the Ld. CIT(A) has not disclosed anything about what is stated in paragraph no. 15 of the form no. 35. In view of this, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable. 12. As the Assessment Proceedings are also carried out ex-parte, hence, in the interest of justice, we restore the whole Appeal back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to examine the details of agricultural income of Rs. 1,36,26,452/-. The Assessee is directed to produce the requisite details before the Ld. Assessing Officer within 120 days from the date of receipt of this order along with evidence and books of accounts. Further, attention Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2027/Bang/2025 Page 6 of 6 must be paid to paragraph no. 2 of the Assessment Order wherein the Assessee has been asked to furnish necessary details in a particular manner. The Assessee must endeavor to furnish these details to ascertain whether the agricultural income shown by the Assessee of Rs. 1.36 crores is correctly shown or not. The Ld. Assessing Officer on examination of such details, may decide the issue afresh, in accordance with the law. In the result, along with ground no. 4, all other grounds of the Appeal are restored back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer. 13. Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 06th February, 2026. Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) Sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Bangalore, Dated, the 06th February, 2026. *TNTS* Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. CIT(A) By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore Printed from counselvise.com "