AA 252 BYANNAPURAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1) ERODE, ERODE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ यायपीठ, चे ई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
ी एबी टी. वक
, ाियक सद एवं
एवं
एवं
एवं
ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम
BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2578/Chny/2024
िनधारणवष/Assessment Year: 2015-16
AA 252 Byannapuram PACCS Ltd.,
Byannapuram, Chimittahalli,
Sathyamangalam,
Erode-638 461. v.
The ITO,
Ward-2(1),
Erode.
[PAN: AACAA 1570 A]
(अपीलाथ/Appellant)
(यथ/Respondent)
अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by :
Ms.A. Vijayalakshmi, CA
(virtual hearing)
यथ क ओर से /Respondent by :
Ms. Swapna Nanu Ambatt,
CIT
सुनवाईकतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
15.01.2025
घोषणाकतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
05.03.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Delhi, dated 08.08.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as "AY”) 2015-16. 2. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) passing the impugned order without going into the merits of AA 252 Byannapuram PACCS Ltd.
:: 2 ::
the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and not admitting the appeal assigning the reason that the appeal was belatedly filed after ‘86’
days delay. Therefore, the Ld CIT(A) didn’t condone the delay and didn’t admit the appeal.
3. The Ld.AR also brought to our notice that the assessee is a Primary
Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative
Societies Act, 1983 and in response to the notice u/s.148 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) filed its return of income
(RoI) on 12.12.2023, by disclosing interest income of Rs.13,01,615/- and claimed deduction u/s.80P of the Act, thereby disclosed ‘NIL’ income. The AO further noted that the assessee during the year has deposited a sum of Rs.6,10,64,830/- and failed to submit any information regarding the source of cash deposits as well as didn’t file copy of the certificate of registration of the society. Therefore, the AO treated the entire cash deposits in its accounts as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and made an addition of Rs.6,10,64,830/-. Thereafter, the AO disallowed the deduction claimed u/s.80P to the tune of Rs.
Rs.13,01,615/- on the ground that the assessee failed to submit the copy of the certificate of registration of the society and proposed addition of both the aforesaid additions by issuing notice dated 09.03.2024; and pursuant thereto, assessee replied that the society borrow funds and the AA 252 Byannapuram PACCS Ltd.
:: 3 ::
cash deposits made in its accounts were out of cash balance of the society. But the AO repelled the same by stating that assessee didn’t furnish any relevant documentary evidence to show the cash balance available as on 31.03.2015 and the details of funds borrowed, etc. The AO acknowledged that the assessee filed counterfoils of cash deposits, but according to him, assessee couldn’t explain the source of cash deposits.
Therefore, being not satisfied about the nature and source of cash deposits, he added Rs.6,10,64,830/- u/s.69A of the Act as well as denied deduction u/s.80P of the Act since assessee failed to furnish the certificate of registration of the society and disallowed Rs.13,01,615/- and thus made total addition of Rs.6,23,66,445/- by framing the assessment order dated 19.03.2024. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who was pleased to dismiss the same only on the ground of delay of ‘86’
days in filing of the appeal and held it as barred by limitation and thus didn’t admit the appeal. Aggrieved, the assessee-society is before us.
Heard both the parties and perused the records. We don’t countenance the impugned action of Ld CIT(A) not admitting the appeal, merely because assessee filed belatedly appeal by 86 days. The assessee society represented by the Ld.AR explained the delay in filing of appeal AA 252 Byannapuram PACCS Ltd.
:: 4 ::
before Ld CIT(A), and taking note of the cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the time prescribed, we are of the view that there exists sufficient cause for condoning the delay of ‘86’ days in filing of the appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, we condone the delay of ‘86’ days. Having said so, we note that the AO has made huge additions of Rs.6,23,66,445/-. In this regard, it is noted that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society and its activities are monitored by the