VIVIDODDHESHA PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKAR SANGH NIYAMIT,CHIKODI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPPANI

ITA 130/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Vividoddhesh Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, a cooperative society, which appealed against the orders of the NFAC for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19. The appeals were initially dismissed by the NFAC for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to respond, attributed to non-receipt of notices. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's claim of non-receipt of notices and decided to set aside the NFAC's orders, remitting the cases back for a fresh hearing. The Tribunal's decision was based on precedents that allow for condonation of delay and setting aside of orders in the interest of justice when procedural lapses occur.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40508 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr, Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIJJULA UNIYAL LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: VEERANNA MURGOD LD.
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 4 BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 129 & 130 /PAN/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Vividoddhesh Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Guruwar Peth, Above Union Bank, Chikodi, Dist. Belgavi PAN:AAAAP1329E . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nippani. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Mr Veeranna Murgod [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 30/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06/11/2024 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; These twin appeals of the assesse are respectively filed against the DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058361073(1) dt. 30/11/2023 & 1058210899(1) dt. 24/11/2024 passed u/s 250 of passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [for short ‘NFAC’] which ascended out of respective penalty/assessment order passed for assessment year 2017-18 & 2018-19 [for short ‘AY’] Vividoddhesh Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Vs ITO ITA Nos.129 & 130/PAN/2024 ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 2. Since facts involved in this bunch of appeals and issue dealt therein are common & identical, therefore on the request of rival parties these appeals for the sake of brevity & convenience are heard together for being disposed-off by common & consolidated order. 3. Against the respective impugned orders, these appeals are filed admittedly with a delay of 105 days & 111 days respectively. The reasons behind such delay in instituting present appeals have been explained by the Ld. AR with the support of undated affidavits placed on records. 4. After vouching the sufficiency of reasons explained, we are satisfied that the appellant was for sufficient cause prevented from filing present appeals against the impugned orders and the case of the assessee falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)]. In view thereof the undeliberate delay of 105 days & 115 days occurred in instituting present appeals respectively, after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice we condone the same and advanced for adjudication. Vividoddhesh Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Vs ITO ITA Nos.129 & 130/PAN/2024 ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 4 5. Without touching merits of these cases, we have heard rival parties common submission on the limited issue of ex-parte dismissal by the Ld. NFAC for non-prosecution and subject to rule 18 of ITAT- Rules 1963 perused material placed on record, considered the facts in the light of settled legal position. 6. We note that, the assessee is co-operative society in whose case a penalty u/s 270A of the Act was imposed for AY 2017-18 vide penalty order dt. 04/08/2021 and whereas an assessment for AY 2018-19 was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide assessment order dt. 19/04/2021 determining thereby the total income at ₹6,40,827/- as against NIL income returned by the assessee. Aggrieved assessee by separate appeals challenged the former imposition of penalty and the assessment before Ld. NFAC, which came to be dismissed in limine for non-prosecution. We also note that, during the course of first appellate proceedings the Ld. NFAC issued four separate notices in each these cases & granted the appellant assessee due hearing/opportunity to substantiate its claim with evidential documents. In the event of failure to on the part of assessee to respond, the appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution. Vividoddhesh Prathamik Grameen Krushi Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Vs ITO ITA Nos.129 & 130/PAN/2024 ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 4 7. The reasons of non-prosecution of appeals by the appellant were solely attributable to non-receipts of notices issued to it by the Ld. NFAC and these is no material placed on records by the respondent to dismantle the claim of the appellant and to suggest otherwise. Therefore we see force in the prayer of the appellant to set-aside the impugned orders and to accord one more opportunity to place evidential material in support of grounds raised before the Ld. NFAC, which Ld. DR could hardly dispute. 8. In view hereof, without commenting on merits, we set-aside these impugned orders under challenge and remit them back to the files of Ld. NFAC with a direction to adjudicate respective subject matter de-novo in accordance with law after providing three effective opportunities in each case separately and pass a speaking orders. 9. In result, both these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Wednesday 06th day of November, 2024. -S/d- -S/d- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Dt: 06th day of November, 2024. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)/NFAC Concerned 4. PCIT Concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File By Order, Sr. Private Secretary / AR ITAT, Panaji. "