GOURINANDAN NAGRI SAHA PATSANSTHA,CHINCHWAD, PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), AKURDI, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Gourinandan Nagri Saha Vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Pune. Patsanstha, Flat No.A-2, RH 91 1, Gourinandan Park Hsg. Society, Block Shanunagar, MIDC, Chinchwad, Pune- 411019. PAN : AAAAG6178Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sushant N. Alme Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Haladkar Date of hearing : 16.07.2026 Date of pronouncement : 06.10.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.05.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for assessment year 2015-16. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 1aw, the Ld. Assessing officer has failed to appreciate that the appellant is a cooperative Credit Society exclusively engaged in

2 ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 providing credit facilities to the members and therefore, the Ld. Assessing Officer was not justified denying the bonfied claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and more so not justified in treating interest on fixed deposit as income under the head " Income from other sources” and Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC also erred in dismissing the Appeal without considering the statement of Facts forming part of Appeal Memorandum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the Society has made investments of its own funds representing Investment of Reserve Fund and investment of Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR) as per the statutory requirements and therefore income on the said investment is not out of surplus funds and therefore it is a Income attributable to providing Credit facilities to the members falling under the head "Income from Business or Profession" and thus eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the Society is engaged in business of collecting daily deposits from their members who are engaged in small trade and commerce in fiduciary capacity. The amount collected from the members towards fixed and daily deposits is regularly deposited in the bank account of the Society. However, the Ld. Assessing Officer as well as Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax - (Appeals)/NFAC failed to consider the facts of the case, nature of business activities though the said information is on the record and therefore wrongly treated sum of Rs.74,84,810/- as unexplained and made addition to taxable income without mentioning the section under which the said addition is made. This clearly shows that the addition is made arbitrarily without application of mind. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in summarily dismissing the Appeal for non-prosecution and failed to apply his mind to the issues without considering the grounds raised in the appeal and statement of facts giving details of bonafrde claim while disposing off the Appeal. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, substitute, vary, delete, and rescind all or any of the above ground(s) of appeal before or at the time hearing.”

3 ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a credit cooperative society engaged in the activity of providing credit facilities to its members and also accepting deposits from them and has not furnished its return of income for the year under consideration. On the basis of information available on insight portal that the assessee has deposited cash to the extent of Rs.74,84,810/-, however, failed to disclose sources of above cash deposit since return of income was not filed, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice u/s 148A(b) of the IT Act was issued to the assessee on 21.03.2022 and after passing order u/s 148A(d) of the IT Act on 30.03.2022, notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued to the assessee on 30.03.2022. The assessee in response furnished return of income on 09.03.2023 by declaring income of Rs.Nil after claiming deduction of Rs.2,25,430/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act. Since the assessee did not furnish any reply to the show cause notice, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 26.03.2023 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the IT Act by determining the income of the asssessee at Rs.77,10,240/- as against the income of Rs.Nil returned by the assessee. The above assessed income includes

4 ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 addition of Rs.2,25,430/- being disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act and addition of Rs.74,84,810/- being unexplained cash deposit in bank account. 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that it is the sole request of the counsel of the assessee that one more opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee to appear before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC so that the assessee can substantiate the grounds of appeal, since the assessee could not appear on the dates of hearing and was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for not appearing before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case and also with the consent of both the parties, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the

5 ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce relevant documents, submissions and evidences in support of its contention without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the ground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Since we have restored the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law by allowing ground no.4, the other grounds become academic in nature, hence not adjudicated by us. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 06th day of October, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 06th October, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.10.08 10:49:55 +05'30'

6 ITA No.1605/PUN/2025 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.