RAIGAD DARSHAN NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE V. ITO WARD 8(3), PUNE

ITA 533/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Raigad Darshan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, a cooperative society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 333 days in filing, attributed to the demise of the former tax counsel and the subsequent appointment of a new counsel. The assessee contested the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 80P and 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, claiming deductions and explaining the nature of their transactions and income. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request to condone the delay and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the substantive issues raised.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314091 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Collector Land Acquisition Anant Nag vs. MSD others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GANESH B BUDRUK
• Assessee Lawyers: MISS KIMYA KUDVA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Unexplained cash credit; Rule of consistency
• Section: 144; 68

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"बी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"B\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 533/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Raigad Darshan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Krishna Vatika, Jyotiba Nagar, Surve No. 77/1/2/1, Kalewadi, Kalewadi B.O-411017 Pune Maharashtra PAN-AACAR7156B Vs ITO Ward 8(3), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Miss Kimya Kudva Revenue by : Shri Ganesh B Budruk- Additional CIT Date of hearing : 28.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 07.05.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2024 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by upholding the addition of Rs. 1.37.27,811/-made by the Learned AO Instead of Rs. NIL, by -Disallowance of the deduction of Rs. 55,87,311/-claimed u/s 80P of the ITA, 1961 -Addition of Rs. 81,40,500/- u/s 68 on account of unexplained cash credits. 2. Learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts in rejecting Appellant's appeal on account of a delay of 333 days in filing an appeal before him. The appellant contends that 2 ITA No. 533/PUN/2025 -Demise of former tax counsel, Mr. Shinde, a month before the conclusion assessment proceedings. -Appellant become aware of demand upon adjustment of refund and further, appointed a new tax counsel. -As such, Delay of 333 days ought to have been condoned. 3. The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that appellant has been claiming this deduction in past many years and as such, considering the principle of consistency deduction u/s 80P of the ITA, 1961 is allowable. 4. The appellant contends that interest income derived from its investments held with various Co-operative banks and other financial institutions is eligible for deduction u/s 80P. The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the appellant is required to keep fixed deposits only to ensure adherence to the statutory requirements. 5. Appellant contends that appellant can transact only with its members, which is as per the byelaws and therefore appellant is eligible to claim deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the ITA, 1961 on surplus / interest income earned from fixed deposits with co operative bank. 6. Appellant contends that, appellant being a co-operative society deals in providing cash credits to its members and all transactions are genuine, the learned AO ough not to have made an addition u/s 68 as unexplained credit amounting to Re 81,40,000 for increase in unsecured loans during the year pertains to the time to tim deposits by the members. 7. The appellant craves leave to add/alter/clarify/explain/modify/enhance /delete any or all of the grounds of appeal, and to seek any just and fair relief. 3. At the outset Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 333 days in filing of the appeal and has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation. Prayer made to condone the delay and remit the issue to the merit of Ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR opposed the request of the Ld. counsel for the assessee stating that the delay is huge and properly not explained by the assessee. 4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee is an association of persons and e-filed return on income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 31.12.2020 and the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 144B completed on 09.09.2022 3 ITA No. 533/PUN/2025 after making additions of Rs. 1,37,27,811/- Assessee filed the appeal to the NFAC/CIT(A) on 07.09.2023 and there was a delay of 333 days. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit duly furnished. However Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay. We however considering the fact that the assessee would not have gained by delaying the appeal and therefore in the larger interest of justice and duly considering the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Anant Nag and others Vs. MSD others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Further since Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case, we remit the issue raised before us on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and to pass a speaking order. Needless to mention that Ld. CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 07th day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दििांक / Dated: 07th May, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 4 ITA No. 533/PUN/2025 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"बी\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"B\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, //True Copy// वररष्ठ धिजी सधचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune "