Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a primary agricultural cooperative credit society, failed to file its return of income for AY 2019-20. The case was re-opened under Section 147 based on cash deposits and withdrawals. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte order under Section 144.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and noted that the assessee failed to participate before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal levied a cost of Rs. 5,000/- on the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the ex-parte assessment order should be set aside.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 69A, 69B, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM :
This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2019-20, vide order dated 12.02.2025.
Brief facts are that the assessee is a primary agricultural cooperative credit society. The assessee had not filed the return of income for the A.Y.2019-20. The case of the assessee’s was re-opened u/s.147 of the Act based on the data of cash deposit of Rs.1,49,96,874/- in bank account maintained with Cuddalore District Central
:-2-: ITA. No:715/Chny/2025 cooperative Bank and cash withdrawal of Rs.3,99,05,533/- from the same bank account. Accordingly, the statutory notices were issued to the assessee. The assessee filed its return of income declaring a total income of Rs.1,83,710/- on 06.05.2023.
Therefore, show-cause notices dated 11.11.2023 and 19.12.2023 were issued upon the assessee proposing to make an addition of cash deposit of Rs.1,49,96,874/- and cash withdrawal of Rs.2,49,08,659/- being the difference between cash withdrawal and cash deposit (Rs.3,99,05,533/- (-) Rs.1,49,96,874/-) along with the interest earned in bank account of Rs.6,36,157/-. However, as the assessee failed to comply to the aforesaid notices issued from time to time the AO concluded the assessment by passing an exparte order u/s.144 of the Act by adding the amount of Rs.4,05,41,690/- for the year under consideration u/s.69A & 69B r.w.s.115BBE of the Act as unexplained money.
Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi.
Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed the appeal with a delay of 59 days and stated that the delay is due to unaware of the E-assessment proceedings and they came to know the order of the AO only on receipt of the demand notice from the AO. However, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as not maintainable by passing an order dated 12.02.2025. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before us. 6. The ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay of 59 days. Further, the assessment order was also passed an exparte u/s.144 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, ld.AR prayed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and sought for one more
:-3-: ITA. No:715/Chny/2025 opportunity before the AO to represent the case in the interest of natural justice. Further, the ld.AR assured the bench that he will undertake to represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO, in case one more opportunity is provided.
Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that the Assessing Officer had provided sufficient opportunity to appear before him. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and also filed the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 59 days and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the Assessing Officer has passed an exparte order by considering the information available with the department. The ld.CIT(A) - NFAC dismissed the appeal as not maintainable without condoning the delay in filing the appeal by 59 days. On perusal of the submissions of the ld.AR and the affidavit filed by the assessee for delay in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A), we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Since, the assessee has failed to participate before the Assessing Officer and also filed the appeal by 59 days delay before the ld.CIT(A), we levy the cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras and produce proof of payment of cost to the Registry within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the AO to denovo frame the assessment order in accordance to law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions, relevant documents if advised so and not take adjournment unnecessarily.
:-4-: ITA. No:715/Chny/2025
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the court on 05th August, 2025 at Chennai.