THE SIWAN CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,SIWAN vs ACIT, CIRCLE 3, DARBHANGA

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH” PATNA

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Rakesh, Adv

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Sh. A.K. Rastogi, Sr. Adv. Sh. Rakesh, Adv. Department represented by : Sh. Ajay Kr. Shukla JCIT (Sr. DR) Date of concluding the hearing : 18.12.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 19.12.2024

ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short 'the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 22.01.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for Assessment Year 2017-18.

1.1 It is seen that the assessee is a Cooperative Bank engaged in banking activities. The following disallowances were made by the Ld. AO:

The Siwan Central Co-Operative Bank Limited (i) Rs. 22,50,000/- on account of Income Tax, (ii) Rs. 2,20,143/- on account of EPF, (iii) Rs. 46,18,027/- on account of certain provisions, and (iv) Rs. 5,00,250/- on account of dividend. 1.2 On appeal, the assessee could not succeed as he could not make any submissions before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, through an ex-parte order, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal.

Aggrieved with this, the assessee has approached the ITAT through the following grounds of appeal: -

1. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in passing an ex-parte order without uploading of notices on the e-portal.

2. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in holding that several opportunities given there has been no compliance on the part of the assessee.

3. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has failed to appreciate that there was no communication on the registered mobile number of service/uploading of the notices on e-portal.

4. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in holding that the assessee is not willing to pursue the appeal in an effective manner and has accordingly erred in dismissing the appeal.

5. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in approving the order of the Assessing Officer as far as additions of Rs.22,50,000/-, Rs.2,20,143/-, Rs.46,18,027/- and Rs.5,00,250/- for which there was no mandate in CASS and no permission/sanction / approval from higher authorities were taken as mandated in administrative instruction/circular of CBDT dated 30/11/2017 in F. No. DGIT(Vig)/HQ/S1/2017- 18.

6. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming addition of Rs.22,50,000/- on account of income tax which stood disallowed in the computation and, thus, its disallowance again has resulted into double addition which is not permissible.

7. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming disallowance on account of Employees' Contribution to PF amounting to Rs.2,20,143/-.

8. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming disallowance on account of NPA/provision/contingency of Rs.46,18,027/-.

9. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in rejecting the claim of deduction u/s 10(34) on account of dividend amounting to Rs.5,00,250/- The Siwan Central Co-Operative Bank Limited 10. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in not adjudicating the ground relating to allowance of deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) @ 7.50%.

11. For that sustenance of additions/ disallowances of Rs.22,50,000/-, Rs.2,20,143/-, Rs.46,18,027/- and Rs.5,00,250/- are wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case.

12. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with documents and evidences on or before date of hearing.

13. For that the appellant may be given opportunity of personal hearing physically/virtually at the time of hearing of the appeal.

14. For that the whole order is bad in fact and law of the case and is fit to be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC.

15. For that the other grounds, if any, shall be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3. Before us the Ld. AR has pleaded that allegedly, due to the assessee not receiving the notices from the Ld. CIT(A)’s office, there was no response from the assessee’s side. It has been averred that such no-compliance was not wilful and that the assessee deserved another chance to present the facts before the Ld. CIT(A).

4. We have considered the documents before us and the averments of the Ld. DR/AR. It is felt that the assessee deserves another chance to present the facts before the Ld. CIT(A) and hence we remand this matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the court on 19.12.2024

THE SIWAN CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,SIWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, DARBHANGA