TYSPL68 ABHISHEKAPURAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,TRICHY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 101/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 August 2026AY 2019-20205 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) upon payment of costs. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeals to the file of the AO for de novo assessment, directing the assessee to provide substantiation for cash deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative credit society, failed to respond to notices from the Assessing Officer (AO) leading to ex parte assessment orders and significant additions. The assessee claimed ignorance of the proceedings until a demand notice was received, resulting in a 210-day delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the ex parte assessment order passed by the AO warrants a de novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Hearing: 18.06.2026

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee-Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society (PACCS) against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 28.08.2025 for the Assessment Years (hereinafter referred to as ‘AYs’) 2016-17 & 2019-20 respectively passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act).

SA No. 53 & 57/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17 & 2019-20) TYSPL68 Abishekapuram Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee drawing our attention to the impugned order submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) without adjudicating grounds of appeal raised by the assessee has refused to condone the delay of 210 days in filing of the appeals before him. According to the assessee, assessee-society was not aware of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) because of which assessee didn’t respond to the notices issued by the AO which led to the passing of the ex parte assessment orders dated 13.01.2024 (AY 2019-20) and (AY 2016-17). Since, the assessee was in the dark about the existence of the assessment orders, the assessee couldn’t file the appeal on time and when the demand notice was issued and assessee received telephonic call from the office of the Income Tax Department, then only assessee realized the existence of the assessment order and immediately filed the appeal which led to the delay of 210 days in filing of the appeal. Hence, he prayed for condoning the delay in filing of the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and prayed for an opportunity before the AO since the AO has passed huge addition of Rs.6,67,63,877/- u/s.69A i.e. entire cash deposits made in the Trichirapalli District Central Co Op Bank for AY 2019-20 and similarly Rs.5,48,61,542/- u/s.69A for AY 2016-17. Hence, prayed for an opportunity before the AO to prove the nature and source which were inter alia cash deposit from the members who are small farmers. Therefore, the Ld.AR relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme

SA No. 53 & 57/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17 & 2019-20) TYSPL68 Abishekapuram Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society :: 3 :: Court in the case of Tin Box Company vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216 prayed for one more opportunity before the AO.

3.

Per contra, the Ld.DR does not want us to give one more innings to the assessee.

4.

Heard both the parties and after perusal of the records, it is noted that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society. Based on information that there was huge deposits made in the Bank account of the assessee and finding that the assessee didn’t file any return of income for the both the captioned assessment years has reopened the assessment for both years, and issued statutory notices, which were not responded by the assessee. Hence, the AO added the entire cash deposits made in the Trichirapalli Dist Central Co Op Bank u/s.69A of the Act to the tune of Rs.6,67,63,877/- and Rs.5,48,61,542/- u/s.69A of the Act for the captioned AYs respectively by-passing separate assessment orders on 13.01.2024. The assessment orders are noted to have been passed without hearing the assessee hence, according to the assessee it was not aware of the assessment proceedings going on against it and only when the demand notice was served upon it, then only it realized that assessment orders have been passed against it and then immediately filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 210

SA No. 53 & 57/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17 & 2019-20) TYSPL68 Abishekapuram Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society :: 4 :: days. The Ld.CIT(A) is noted to have refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

Having gone through the reasons for the delay as revealed from the application for condoning the delay, we are of the view that the assessee didn’t deliberately or intentionally didn’t file the appeal on time. The assessee has been saddled with huge additions for not explaining the nature and source of the cash deposits in the Trichirapalli District Central Co Op Bank. We condone the delay of filing of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) provided the assessee remit the cost of ₹10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) which shall be deposited by the assessee within three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order to 'Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority' at Hon'ble High Court of Madras and submit the proof of deposit of cost before the AO. Having condoned the delay as noted supra, we find that the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the ground of appeal of the assessee on merits. Hence, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and taking note that the AO has passed an ex parte order qua the assessee, we relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tin Box Company (supra) restore the appeal back to the file of AO for de nova assessment. And the assessee is directed to file documents called for by AO in order to substantiate nature and source of cash deposit before the AO/verifying unit of the

SA No. 53 & 57/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17 & 2019-20) TYSPL68 Abishekapuram Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society :: 5 :: department; and the AO to frame the assessment after considering the report of verifying unit, in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Stay petitions being infructuous are dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 06th day of August 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (गगन गोयल) (एबी टी. वक�) (ABY T. VARKEY) (GAGAN GOYAL) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 06th August, 2026. YS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF YASHVIR Digitally signed by YASHVIR SINGH SINGH Date: 2026.08.12 16:06:03 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →