MAJI SAINIK SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA,AHILANAGAR vs. ITO, WD-2 , AHILYANAGAR

ITA 2360/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 October 2026AY 2018-195 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the totality of the facts and in the interest of justice, set aside the order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The matter was restored back to the file of the CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to condone the delay in filing the appeal and decide the appeal on merits. The assessee was directed to respond to notices, produce relevant documents, submissions, and evidence without seeking adjournments. The CIT(A)/NFAC was granted liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law if the assessee failed to comply. The grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal did not go into the merits of the additions made by the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Maji Sainik Sahakari Patsanstha Maryad, is a credit cooperative society. For Assessment Year 2018-19, it failed to file a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case based on information regarding time deposits of Rs. 8,94,454/- and cash deposits of Rs. 1,18,81,608/-. Notices under Section 148A(b) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were issued. The assessee did not comply. The AO completed the assessment under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, determining the income at Rs. 22,01,431/-. This included an addition of Rs. 13,06,977/- (profit estimated at 11% of cash deposits) and Rs. 8,94,454/- (unexplained investment under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE). The assessee appealed to the CIT(A)/NFAC, but the appeal was dismissed due to a delay in filing without condonation.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO without appreciating that the notice under Section 148 was issued without prior approval of the specified authority, rendering the assessment null and void? (Question of law, relying on Section 148). The assessee argued that the assessment is void due to the lack of prior approval for the Section 148 notice. 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him due to genuine reasons and without giving an opportunity to file submissions on merit? (Question of mixed law and fact). The assessee contended that the delay was genuine and the CIT(A) should have condoned it and allowed an opportunity to argue the merits. 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO without appreciating that the AO made the addition without application of mind and without applying the best of his judgment? (Question of law). The assessee argued that the AO's assessment lacked proper application of mind and best judgment. 4. The assessee sought permission to add, amend, or modify grounds of appeal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 142,Section 69,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Prasad Bhandari (Virtual), Shri Sanjiv Kumar Verma
Hearing: 01.09.2026Pronounced: 05.10.2026

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.01.2026 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. There is delay of 42 days in filing of the present appeal. After going through the application for condonation of delay, we are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient & reasonable cause for not 2 filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay of 42 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.

3.

The appell

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →