SRI BASAVESHWARA GRUHA NIRMANA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA,GUNHOUSE CIRCLE RAMANUJAR MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), MYSORE, MYSORE KARNATAKA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV
PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Both appeals of the assessee are arising from the order of Ld.CIT(A) dated
23/09/2024 and relates to AY 2013-14 and 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a housing building co-operative society registered under the Karnataka State Co-operative Societies Act,
1959. It is pertinent to note here that as per the status of PAN data of the assessee, the status of the assessee is partnership firm. For the year under consideration, the assessee has not filed any return of income.
Page 2 of 3
ITA Nos. 2253 & 2254/Bang/2024
Thereafter on the basis of the information, revealing that the assessee was in the receipt of an income of Rs. 72,11,236/- from different banks. The case of the assessee has been reopened u/s. 147 of the IT Act. Thereafter, the proceedings of the present case have been transferred from NFAC to the juri ictional assessing officer. Thereafter, so many notices were issued by the assessing officer. However, despite the issue of several notices, nobody appeared from the side of assessee. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has not filed any return of income for both the assessment years. Finally, the assessing officer assessed the income of the assessee by disallowing the interest income earned by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,21,34,479/- and the credits appearing in the bank account of the assessee amounting to Rs.
15,43,15,324/-.
Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). However, despite the issuance of so many notices from the officer of the Ld.CIT(A), no one appeared before the Ld.CIT(A) and hence the Ld.CIT(A) affirmed the additions made by the assessing officer.
Aggrieved with the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us and at the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that one more opportunity before the AO may kindly be granted. When the Bench asked about the non-compliance of the notices of authorities below, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee was having two PAN Nos. and the assessee was pursuing the notices on the wrong PAN and hence could not be able to appear before the Ld.AO or the Ld.CIT(A).
The Ld.DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.
First of all, we would like to observe that it is a case where no return of income has been filed by the assessee for claiming the deduction of Page 3 of 3 ITA Nos. 2253 & 2254/Bang/2024
section 80P. Therefore, whether the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s.
80P or not in view of the provision of section 80A(5) as interpreted by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Chirakara Service Co-Op Bank
Therefore, in the interest of justice, we restore these matters to the file of assessing officer for deciding it afresh subject to a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by the assessee in the income tax department under the head
“Others”. The assessee will deposit this amount and show the challan to the AO. Needless to say that the AO will grant sufficient opportunities to the assessee before passing any order.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27th March, 2025. (WASEEM AHMED)
Judicial Member
Bangalore,
Dated, the 27th March, 2025. /MS /
Copy to:
1. Appellant
Respondent 3. CIT
DR, ITAT, Bangalore
Guard file
CIT(A)
By order