SHREE GOMTESH NAGARI SAH PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,SANGLI V. ITO WARD 5, SANGLI

ITA 924/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals filed by Shree Gomtesh Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2020-21. The appeals were consolidated due to their related issues concerning the non-filing of returns and the subsequent assessments made under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the ex-parte orders confirming substantial additions to the assessee's income, which were challenged on grounds of procedural lapses and miscommunication. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a final opportunity to present its case and thus restored the matters to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713359 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMOL KHAIRNAR
• Assessee Lawyers: AMOL R KULKARNI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.924, 925 & 926/PUN/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2020-21 & 2016-17 Shree Gomtesh Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit At and Post Islampur, Taluka Walwa, Dist. Sangli – 415409 Vs. ITO, Ward 5, Sangli PAN: AAAAS9627G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Amol R Kulkarni Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and Ms Shraddha Nichal Date of hearing : 31-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER BENCH : ITA Nos.924/PUN/2025 & 926/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 10.02.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively. ITA No.925/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.01.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2020-21. For the sake of convenience, all the three appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 ITA No.924/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,44,37,302/- as against the Nil returned income. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an AOP and the case was picked up in Non-Filing of Return under priority P1 from Insight portal. Since it was seen that there were huge financial transactions for the impugned assessment year but the assessee has not filed the return of income, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Since there was no response from the side of the assessee and it was filing only adjournment petitions twice and no details were filed, the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,44,37,302/- by making addition of Rs.5,23,35,039/- u/s 69A, Rs.1,20,00,000/- u/s 69 and Rs.1,02,263/- as income from other sources. 4. Since the assessee despite four opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC did not make any submission but was seeking adjournment after adjournment, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal in absence of any supporting documents. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that due to miscommunication by the concerned employee of the assessee, there was no compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. He submitted that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details. 7. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and submitted that despite number of opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee for which the additions were made. He accordingly submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should be upheld and the grounds raised by the assessee be dismissed. 8. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that due to non-compliance to various statutory notices, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,44,37,302/- by making various additions. Since the assessee did not make any submission before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and was seeking adjournment after adjournment, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date and make its submissions, if any, without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.926/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17) 9. Grounds raised by the assessee are as under: 1. National Faceless Appeals Centre (hereinafter referred to as \"learned CIT(A)\") erred in law and on facts in confirming the assessed income of the appellant to the tune of Rs.13,36,753 by not allowing deduction u/s 80P of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not allowing deduction of Rs.13,36,753 u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 considering the facts that, interest received from co-operative banks is part of net profits having direct nexus with the business activity of the appellant. 3. Alternatively, and without prejudice to Ground No.2 above, the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not allowing deduction of Rs.13,36,753 u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by not appreciating fact that the Co- operative Banks are Co-operative Societies registered under State Legislation. 4. Alternatively, and without prejudice to Ground No.2 above, the learned AO erred in law and on facts by incorrectly invoking the provision of Section 80P(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for denying the deduction of Rs.13,36,753 u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 5. The appellant craves / leave to add / modify / delete / amend all / any of the grounds of appeal. 10. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee did not file the return of income for the impugned assessment year. Since the assessee during the year under consideration had deposited cash amounting to Rs.1,69,62,383/- in its bank account, had received commission / brokerage of Rs.90,711/-, earned interest other than interest on securities of Rs.16,876/- and earned fee for professional and technical services of Rs.4,647/- along with certain other financial transactions, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee in response to the said notice filed the return of income on 05.10.2023 declaring taxable income at Nil after claiming the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) of the Act of Rs.14,15,604/-. The Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act rejected the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) amounting to Rs.13,36,753/- on the ground that the assessee has received interest from Co- operative bank. 11. Since the assessee did not make any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 12. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 13. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. A perusal of page 3 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shows that he has given 4 opportunities to the assessee out of which the assessee sought adjournments on two occasions and did not make any compliance in other two occasions, the details of which are as under: Date of Hearing Date of Compliance Remarks 30.03.2024 15.04.2024 Adjournment sought on 23.04.2024 28.05.2024 12.06.2024 Adjournment sought on 11.06.2024 by stating that AR is pre-occupied in ITR filing. 13.08.2024 27.08.2024 Not Complied 17.01.2025 24.01.2025 Not Complied 14. While deciding the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.924/PUN/2025 we have restored the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. Following similar reasonings, we restore this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC for fresh adjudication after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.925/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2020-21) 15. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 30.10.2018 declaring Nil income after claiming Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act of Rs.37,46,880/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B by assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.65,39,266/- by treating interest income from the investments as ‘income from other sources’. 16. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 17. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 18. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assesse. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset filed certain decisions of the Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal stating that under identical circumstances the Tribunal has allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) of the Act. However, we find for assessment years 2015-16 and 2016- 17, such claim of the assessee was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on account of non-prosecution by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. Since in those years also there was claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) of the Act and the matter has been restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC for fresh adjudication, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore this issue to the file of the Ld. Printed from counselvise.com 8 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 19. In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31st July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 31st July, 2025 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com 9 ITA Nos.924 to 926/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 31.07.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 31.07.2025 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "