SWATANTRYAVIR SAVARKAR NAGARI SAHAKARI PATANSTHA MARYADIT,NASHIK V. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

ITA 2796/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Swatantryavir Savarkar Nagari Sahakari Patanstha Maryadit, a credit co-operative society, which appealed against the orders of the CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19. The society had not filed its return of income, and upon discovering a large cash deposit, the case was reopened under sections 147/148 of the IT Act. The society later filed a return declaring a significantly lower income than assessed, which included unexplained money under section 69A read with section 115BBE. The CIT(A) dismissed the society's appeal due to a 132-day delay in filing, which the society attributed to their lack of access to the income tax portal and absence of technical staff. The Tribunal found merit in the society's arguments and decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474167 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S. SHINGTE
• Keywords: Competent authority
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Swatantryavir Savarkar Nagari Sahakari Patanstha Maryadit, 1, Javer Bhuvan, Opposite Rathi Sadan, Subnash Road, Nashik Road, Nashik- 422101. PAN : AAQCS3784G Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: Both the above captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 18.11.2024 u/s 271AAC(1) and 21.11.2024 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the IT Act passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19 respectively. 2. Since the facts are identical and both the appeals were heard together, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 27.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.02.2025 ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 2 ITA No.2798/PUN/2024, : 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a credit co-operative society. The assessee society has not furnished its return of income for the period under consideration. On the basis of information that the assessee has deposited huge cash amounting to Rs.1,38,28,960/-, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147/148 of the IT Act after recording reasons with the prior approval of competent authority. Notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee and in response to the same, the assessee has furnished its return of income on 06.05.2022 declaring total income of Rs.91,275/-. Notices u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued to the assessee but assessee has not complied with the above notices. Thereafter, a show-cause notice was also issued but the assessee remained absent. Accordingly, the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 by determining total income at Rs.1,39,20,235/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.91,275/-. The above assessed income includes unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of Rs.1,38,28,960/-. Since the assessee furnished first appeal belatedly with a delay of 132 days, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal without ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 3 condoning the delay. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee is a small credit cooperative society and the office bearers of the assessee society are not well-versed with the technology and, therefore, unable to access the income tax portal. It was further submitted by Ld. AR that being a small credit co-operative society, full time accountant or technical person was not affordable to the assessee society and due to this reason the notices which were sent by the Assessing Officer and also by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC could not be looked into. It was also contended before the Bench that since Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not decided the appeal on merits of the case and summarily dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay which is a genuine hardship on the assessee society. It was further prayed that if an opportunity be given to the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC it would meet the ends of interest of justice and equity. Accordingly, it was prayed before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and it was further requested to direct Ld. ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 4 CIT(A)/NFAC to condone the delay of 132 days and decide the appeal on merits. 5. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders of the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the assessee is a small credit co-operative society and since the office bearers are not tech friendly & there was no competent technical staff who can access the income tax portal, the notices sent on e-mail ID of the assessee society could not be seen by them which resulted in ex-parte orders passed by both the subordinate authorities. We further find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not condoned the delay of 132 days in filing the appeal before him & dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It was the sole prayer of the counsel of the assessee that the delay of 132 days in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC was unintentional and due to the reason that no physical order was sent to the assessee the office bearers could not see the order of assessment and which resulted in delay filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. An affidavit in support of above contentions is also filed before the Bench. We ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 5 find some force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that if one opportunity is provided to the assessee to appear before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, they will substantiate the grounds of appeal raised by them. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to condone the delay of 132 days and decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce supporting documents/evidences & explanations, if any, in support of their claim, without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the present appeal are partly allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2798/PUN/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.2796/PUN/2024 : 8. Since we have set-aside the quantum appeal of the assessee and remanded the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the appeal afresh, therefore, this being the consequential ITA Nos.2796 & 2798/PUN/2024 6 penalty order also needs to be set-aside and accordingly we remand the penalty appeal order back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the penalty appeal afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee in the instant appeal are partly allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.2796/PUN/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. To sum up, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 28th day of February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 28th February, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "