DAIVAJNA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA,DHARWAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(5), HUBLI

This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 31.7.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

Without prejudice the Hon'ble NFAC ought to have held that the interest earned from investments in other Co-operative Banks / Co-operative Institutions qualify for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act.

The Hon'ble NFAC erred in upholding addition under the head income from other sources of Rs.14,2l,6l1/-u/s 56of the Act

The order of the Hon'ble NFAC is bad in law,

The Appellant craves for leave to add. to delete from or amend the grounds of appeal.

There was a delay of 18 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed a condonation petition stating that the assessee received the communication from the Income-tax department, Verification Unit on 10.10,2023 stating that there were non-compliance against notices received from National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC). In the said notice, the Appellant was asked to respond within 5 days. Upon receiving the said communication, the assessee contacted their Chartered Accountant who has access to the Income-tax portal and found out that the National Faceless Appeal Centre had passed order u/s 250 of the Act wherein the appeal was dismissed. It is important to note that at the material time the e-mail ID provided in the IT portal was that of their Chartered Accountant namely Shri. Krishnamurthy V. Deshpande having their office at Jayawanti, 3rd Main, Basal Mission Compound, Near NTTF, Dharwad - 580 001. Therefore, the assessee was unaware of the notices being issued and there was no response to the said Notices. Further, during the period 22.09.2023 to 08.10.2023 the CEO of the assessee society was under medical supervision and was advised rest till 08.10.2023. All these unfortunate circumstances led to the delay in filing the appeal. However, upon receiving the order u/s 250, the assessee forthwith took necessary steps and contacted Advocates. The memo of appeal came to be prepared on 17.10.2023 and was uploaded on 17.10.2023 resulting Daivajna Pattina Souharda Sahakari Niyamita, Dharwad Page 3 of 4 in a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal. The assessee was prevented by reasonable cause and there was absolutely no negligence on its part in prosecuting the filing of an appeal. The Applicant took all due diligence to file the appeal on time but it was beyond its control and the delay that is caused in filing the appeal is not because of its negligence. The assessee submitted that if delay in filing the appeal is not condoned great hardship and loss will be caused but on the other hand no hardship, loss or injury would be caused to the Respondent if delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Wherefore, the assessee prayed that the delay of 18 days in filing the appeal be condoned in the interest of justice and equity and the matter be heard on the merits.

The ld. D.R. submitted that the appeal may be dismissed without condoning the delay.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. There was a short delay of 18 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has explained that the assessee given an e-mail ID of its Chartered Accountant Shri Krishnamurthy V. Deshpande to the department and he has failed to see the order passed by the ld. NFAC sent to his e-mail address. Thus, there was a delay in filing this appeal before this Tribunal. In our opinion, there is a good and sufficient reason in filing the appeal belatedly by 18 days. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. 4.1. In this case, assessment order dated 5.12.2019 has been passed u/s 144 of the Act without participation of the assessee. Similarly, the appeal order dated 31.7.2023 has been passed ex-parte without participation of the assessee, wherein there was no participation of the assessee though various opportunities were given to it. Similarly, before NFAC also there was no proper response from the assessee’s side. In our opinion, it is appropriate to remit the issue to the file of AO with the direction to the assessee to participate in the assessment proceedings before ld. AO by filing necessary details. Accordingly, all the issues in dispute before us are remitted to the file