THE RATYOUR KRISHI SEWA SAHKARI SABHA SAMITI,DHABHOTA V. ITO, BADDI

ITA 315/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves The Ratyour Krishi Sewa Sahkari Sabha Samiti, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer. The primary contention was the denial of deduction under section 80P(2) of the Income Tax Act on a net profit of Rs. 80,869 and the addition of a provision for Non-Performing Assets (NPA) amounting to Rs. 1,74,160. The Tribunal noted that both the initial assessment and the appeal were conducted ex-parte and found procedural lapses in the handling of the case, particularly the failure to adhere to mandatory procedures under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712335 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reopening of assessment
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 315/CHD/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Ratyour Krishi Sewa Sahkari Sabha Samiti, Village – Dabhota, Tehsil-Nalagarh,Distt.Solan. V s The ITO, Baddi, Distt. Solan (HP). èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AADAT8941M अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Assessee by : None ( Adjournment Application ) Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 16.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.07.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 11.09.2024. 2. In response to the notice of hearing, an application for adjournment has been filed, however after going through the record, we do not find any reason to adjourn the hearing. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.315/CHD/2025 A.Y.2013-14 2 3. With the assistance of ld. DR, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out that appeal is time barred by 91 days and application for condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee alongwith affidavit of one Shri Krishan Singh, who was the Secretary of the assessee Society. It has been pleaded that during the relevant time, he was facing challenges at his family. His daughter-in-law has lost sight in one eye and because of his pre-occupance in her treatment, he could not file appeal. After looking to the explanation given by the assessee, we condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 4. A perusal of the assessment order would reveal that income of the assessee has been computed by the AO as under: Subject to the above remarks, total Income of the assessee is computed as under:- Net profit as per P & L a/c Rs. 80,869/- Add-Provision of NPA Rs. 1,74,160/- Total Income Rs.2,55,029/- Assessed at total Income of Rs.2,55,030/- u/s 147/144 of the IT. Act, 1961. Charge interest as per rules. Issue requisite documents. 4.1 In other words, deduction u/s 80P(2) of the Act has been denied on the net profit of Rs.80,869/- and provision of NPA has been added to the total income. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.315/CHD/2025 A.Y.2013-14 3 5. Appeal to the CIT (Appeals), did not bring any relief to the assessee. 6. A perusal of the record would reveal that both the impugned orders were ex-parte i.e. assessment has been framed u/s 144 and appeal has been dismissed by the CIT (Appeals) for want of prosecution. Sub-clause (6) of Section 250 contemplates that CIT (Appeals) would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons in respect of her conclusion on those points, but ld. CIT (Appeals) has failed to adhere this mandatory procedure. Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable. Since the assessment order is also an ex- parte order, therefore, we deem it appropriate to set aside both the orders and restore all these issues to the file of AO. We further direct that AO would not explore any other issue except two additions made by him. The assessee will be at liberty to raise objections against re-opening of assessment. It would also be taken into consideration that no new addition is to be made to the income, in case he does not accept the contentions of the assessee. In other words, income Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.315/CHD/2025 A.Y.2013-14 4 determined by the AO would not exceed in the set aside assessment. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "