THE PALAKKAD CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY LTD,PALAKKAD V. ITO,WARD 2, PALAKKAD

ITA 872/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves The Palakkad Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd., which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)), which had dismissed their appeal ex parte without a proper examination of the facts. The original dispute arose from the disallowance of a deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs.65,34,893, by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the merits of the case and had not provided a fair opportunity to the assessee to present their case. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633609 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL; SNR
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member ITA No.872/Coch/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 The Palakkad Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd. Chittur Road, Kunnathurmedu Post, Palakkad, Kerala – 678013. PAN : AAEAT8777G. v. ITO, Ward-2, Palakkad (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR Date of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.06.2025 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order dated 07.08.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the instant appeal before the Tribunal. In this connection, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of such delay and after considering the same, we condone the delay and admit this appeal for adjudication. ITA No.872/Coch/2024 The Palakkad Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd. 2 3. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, although notices were served from the registry to the assessee. We cannot keep this appeal pending for inordinate delay for adjudication; therefore, we feel it necessary to decide this appeal on the basis of material available on record and with the assistance of the ld. DR. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society and engaged in purchase and sale of commodities. Return of income was filed for the relevant assessment year on 29.01.2019. Later on, the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS in order to verify the issue relating to deduction under chapter VIA for claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act. Accordingly, statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. In response to the notices, the ld. AR of the assessee appeared time to time before the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer did not satisfy with the explanation given by the assessee and disallowed Rs.65,34,893/- after denying the deduction u/s 80P on the ground of non-satisfaction of production of sufficient proof to prove the activity of the society as genuine to claim the benefit of section 80P of the Act. . 5. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) without properly examining the factual matrix of the case and the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal ex parte without giving proper opportunity to the assessee to prove its case. ITA No.872/Coch/2024 The Palakkad Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd. 3 6. The ld. DR has agreed to the fact that in the interests of justice, the Tribunal may remand back the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh. 7. We, after hearing the submission of the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex parte by the ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order of the Assessing Officer without looking into merits of the case and without applying any independent mind by the ld. CIT(A). In the interests of justice and fair play, we, therefore, deem it necessary to remand back the whole issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh. We also direct the assessee to file supporting documents in support of the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act to substantially prove the case before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) will pass order in accordance with law after giving proper and sufficient opportunities of hearing to the assessee. 8. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10.06.2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) Accountant Member Judicial Member Cochin, Dated: 10.06.2025. RS Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Concerned. ITA No.872/Coch/2024 The Palakkad Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd. 4 4. The CIT Concerned. 5. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 6. Guard File. Asst. Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "