KEDGAON GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, SOLAPUR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1983/PUN/2025
Assessment Year : 2015-16
Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti
Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit,
Kedgaon Karmala,
Solapur – 413202
Maharashtra
PAN : AACTK1425B
Vs. Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1, Pandharpur
Appellant
Respondent
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated
27.06.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi
(NFAC) arising out of Assessment Order dated 30.01.2024
passed u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act,
1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Brief facts are that the assessee is a Cooperative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its Members. Assessee society has not filed the return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 for the year under consideration. Based on Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Revenue by : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath Date of hearing : 23.02.2026 Date of pronouncement : 13.03.2026 Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
2
the information that assessee has made cash deposits/time deposits, case reopened u/s.147 of the Act. Statutory notices u/s.142(1) were served upon the assessee society, however there was no compliance on the part of the assessee and ld. Assessing Officer formed belief that there is escapement of income. Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act assessing the income at Rs.52,53,459/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of 391 days.
Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay. Further, there is no adjudication on merits of the case as well. Now the assessee is in appeal before us assailing the impugned order.
Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) were furnished and eventhough the said reasons were reproduced in the impugned order, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the asssessee, therefore, the issues raised in the instant appeal deserves restoration to the file ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merits as the assessee has prima-facie case to substantiate the cash deposits/time deposits so made.
ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We on perusal of the orders of both the lower authorities find that orders were passed exparte Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
3
owing to non-compliance from the side of the assessee. We find that assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 391 days which has not been condoned by ld.CIT(A).
We have carefully gone through the statement of facts filed before ld.CIT(A) and the reasons which led to delay in presenting the appeal before ld.CIT(A). We find that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from delaying the appeal. We therefore placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector,
Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable
Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti
Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
4
cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 13th day of March, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 13th March, 2026. Satish
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.
ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////