SHRI VENKATESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI LIMITED,1210, ATHANI H.O, ATHNI, BELGAUM, 591304, KARNATAK V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BELGAUM

ITA 206/PAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd, a cooperative credit society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the denial of a deduction claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had initially denied the deduction, leading to an appeal before the CIT(A), which was dismissed ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance with hearing notices. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the assessee's circumstances for non-appearance and decided to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present its case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 777199 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2025
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJU THAKUR.
• Assessee Lawyers: JAYKUMAR PATIL
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. Nos.206/PAN/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd, 1210,Athani, H.O.Athani, Belagavi-591304, Karnataka. Vs . ITO-Ward-3, Feroj khimjibhai cpx, Civil Hospital Road Belagavi-590001. Karnataka. . PAN .No. AACAS1356G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Jaykumar Patil.AR Revenue by Smt.Manju Thakur.Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 10.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 15.09.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of ADDL/JCIT (A)-2 Jaipur passed u/sec 143(3) and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the denial of claim of deduction u/sec80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a cooperative credit society and is engaged in activities of providing credit facilities to its members. The assesse has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2017-18 on 25.01.2018 disclosing a total income of Rs.Nil after Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA. No..206/PAN/2025 Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd. claiming deduction of Rs.18,54,940/- u/sec 80P of the Act. Subsequently the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS to examine (i) Low income in comparison to high loans/advances/investment in shares appearing in balance sheet and (ii) Large deduction Under Chapter VIA from total income. Further notice u/sec143 (2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act are issued calling for details in support of return of income filed. The assesse has filed the details from time to time and the Assessing Officer (A.O) has dealt on the submissions/details of regular members and associate members and find that the assessee is not eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and also the A.O. was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions and judicial decisions and denied the claim of deduction u/sec80P2(a)(i) of the act of Rs.18,54,940/and assessed the total income of Rs.18,54,940/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 11.12.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA. No..206/PAN/2025 Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. Further the assesse has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no compliance nor appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assesse is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing on various dates i.e 14.01.2021,5.10.2023,15.01.2024&05.02.2024 referred at Page 2 Para 2 of the order but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the denial of claim of deduction u/sec 80P of the Act by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA. No..206/PAN/2025 Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd. of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information subject to payment of cost of Rs.1000/- to the income tax department within one month from the date of receipt of the order and produce the proof of payment. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on the disputed issue and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information. And the grounds of appeal of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15.09.2025. -S/d- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 15/09/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA. No..206/PAN/2025 Shri Venkateshwar Urban Credit Souhard Sahakari Ltd. 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 Printed from counselvise.com "