PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, SOLLAPURA,SOLLAPURA, TARIKERE CHIKAMAGALUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, CHIKMAGALUR, CHICKMAGALUR, KARNATAKA

The assessee is a society and the AO based on the information that the assessee has made cash deposits in one or more accounts of a person maintained with the Chikkmagalur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., had initiated proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act. The AO had issued a notice u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and the assessee had not responded to the said notice and therefore an order u/s. 148A(d) was made. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 was also issued for which also the assessee had not furnished any return and also not responded to the subsequent notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act. The AO based on the details collected from the said Chikkmagalur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. by issuing notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act had arrived the conclusion that the assessee had deposited in his savings bank account but the source for the said deposits were not explained and therefore the AO had treated the said deposits as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act.

As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay 274 days. The Ld.CIT(A) had not accepted the reasons stated in the delay condonation application and therefore dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation.

As against the said order, the present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal.

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the reason for not filing the appeal in time before the Ld.CIT(A) was that the assessee was not familiar with the online / faceless proceedings and therefore the appeal could not be filed in time. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee being a society in which the staff are not well versed with the e-assessment as well as e-appeal proceedings and therefore it was the genuine reason and prayed to condone the said delay and allow the assessee to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) for deciding the issue on merits. The Ld.AR further submitted

The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that no proper explanation was offered by the assessee in the delay condonation application and therefore submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) was right in rejecting the said delay condonation application.

We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.

From the submissions made by the assessee, we find that the assessee is a co-operative society and does not have any staff who are well versed with the e-proceedings. The said fact also could not be brushed aside by us. Normally in the society, some one or two persons will be employed that too by way of temporary appointment with meagre salary and therefore the fact that the assessee was not able to access the e-proceedings could not be denied.

Considering the said facts, we are satisfied that the assessee society was having sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time before the Ld.CIT(A) and therefore we condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and remit this issue to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for denovo consideration. We also made it clear that the assessee should co-operate with the Ld.CIT(A) and complete the appeal proceedings as early as possible. We also direct the assessee to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- by way of cost to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund and produce the receipt before the Ld.CIT(A).

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