BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

That the Order of the learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals). Cuttack \"Cri(Appeals) "] dated 01.08.2017, in dismissing the appeal, is against the principles of natural justice, contrary to facts, arbitrary, excessive, erroneous and bad. both in the eye of law and on facts.

That the learned CIT(Appeals), in holding that the appeal is dismissed for the non prosecuting the appeal, is against the principles of natural justice, arbitrary, unjustified, erroneous and bad, both in the eye, of law and on facts and legally untenable.

That the case law followed by the learned CIT(Appeals), in dismissing the appeal is distinguishable on facts and hence not applicable to the case of the appeal.

That the learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have passed a speaking order and decided the Grounds of appeal before him. Status of the assessee

That the status of the assessee is a 'Co-Operative Society' and the learned Assessing Officer assessing as a 'Co- Operative Bank' vide assessment order dated 25.03.2015 is unjustified, arbitrary, contrary to facts, erroneous, bad on facts as well as in law and legally untenable.

Addition/disallowance under 'Provision for fraud" – Rs.7,00,010/- a. That the Learned Assessing Officer has mis-appreciated/ / misconstrued the facts and the addition/disallowance of Rs.7,00,010/- under the nomenclature 'Provision for fraud'" vide order dated 25.03.2015 is against principles of natural justice, contrary to facts, arbitrary, erroneous and bad in law. b. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the aforesaid Rs.7,00,010/- in respect of write off of loss due to 'fraud" being fully allowable under the Act ought not have been added/ disallowed. Addition/disallowance of amounts written off/ amortization of Government Securities - Rs. 1,23,577/- a. That the Learned Assessing Officer has mis- appreciated/misconstrued the facts and the addition/disallowance of Rs.1,23,577/- under the nomenclature 'Provision for write off of/ amortization of Government Securities" vide order dated 25.03.2015 is contrary to facts, arbitrary. erroneous and-bad m law. b. The aforesaid Rs.1,23,577/- added/disallowed b\ the learned Assessing Officer the under write off of/ amortization of Government Securities' in is in fact write off of Advances and not amortization of Government Securities'. c. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the ease, the aforesaid Rs. 1,23,577/- for amounts written off being fully allowable under the Act ought not have been added/ disallowed.

Addition/disallowance under "Provision tor Non-SLR Securities, as per Mark to market valuation' - Rs.12,14,305/-

Addition/disallowance under "exempted income" u/s,!4A of the Act- Rs. 16,93,703/- a. That the Learned Assessing Officer has mis-appreciated/ / misconstrued the facts and the addition/disallowance of Rs. 16,93,703/- under "exempted income" u/s. 14A of the Act- vide order dated 25.03.2015 is contrary to .lets, arbitrary, excessive, erroneous and bad in law. b. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the aforesaid Rs. 16.93.703/-"towards exempted income" u/s.l4A of the Act the Act ought not have been added/ disallowed.

Deduction u/s.80P of the Act Without prejudice to Grounds 5 to 8 above, in an) case, the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s.80P of the I.T.Act and hence the deduction u/s.SOP of the Act is to be allowed and the total income ought to be assessed at Rs.'NIL'.

Non credit of Advance tax and self Assessment tax oi its.38,48,434/- That the Non credit of Advance tax and self Assessment tax of Rs.3 8.48,434/-(Rs. 1,18.44.510- Rs.79,96,076/-) by the Learned Assessing Officer in order dated 25.03.2015 is contrary to facts, arbitrary, incorrect, erroneous and bad in law.

Levy of Interest u/s. 234B, u/s.234C and u/s.234D of the Act - Rs.25,969/-, Rs.1,07,054/- and Rs.1,33,938/- u/s.234B, 234C and u/s.234D) respectively. That the assessee denies the liability for interest of Rs.25,969/-, Rs. 1,07.054/- and Rs. 1,33.938/- levied u/s. 234B. 234C and 234D of the Act respectively vide order dated 25.03.2015 and the said interest charged are incorrect, wrong, erroneous and bad in law.

At the outset, ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has passed the ex- parte order without providing any opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the ld. AR prayed for an opportunity to represent its case before the CIT(A).

On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the orders of lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the relevant material placed in the record of the Tribunal. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex-parte. Ld. AR before the Bench submitted that the assessee has filed its written submission before the CIT(A), which has not been considered by the CIT(A) and passed the ex-parte order. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and fair-play, there will be no loss to the Revenue if one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to represent its case before the CIT(A). Accordingly, we restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of CIT(A) to pass a speaking and reasoned order considering the findings of AO and the submissions of the assessee, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the CIT(A) in early disposal of the case.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/07/2019. (C.M.GARG) (L.P.SAHU) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनांक Dated 26/07/2019 प्र.कु.मम/PKM, Sr.P.S.