3 PARIYUR NANJAGOUNDENPALAYAM PACCS,GOBICHETTYPALAYAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ERODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2798/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 February 2025AY 2016-2017Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the grounds of appeal on merits. For the ends of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for a decision on merits after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative society, filed its return admitting 'Nil' income after claiming deduction u/s.80P. The assessment order denied this deduction, resulting in an addition. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), which dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The assessee is now before the tribunal seeking another opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits, and if not, what is the appropriate relief.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 27.01.2025Pronounced: 26.02.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/Addl./JCIT(A), (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)‘), Mysore, dated 13.09.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY‘) 2016-17.

(AY 2016-17) 4083 Pariyur Nanjagoundenpalayam- PACCS Ltd. :: 2 ::

2.

The main grievance of the assessee is against action of the Ld.CIT(A) who has passed an ex parte order without going into the merits of the case.

3.

Brief facts are that the assessee is a co-operative society, which filed its return of Income (RoI) for AY 2016-2017 on 31/11/2017 admitting ‘Nil’ Income, after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘). The assessment was completed by an order u/s.143(3) dated 29/12/2018 wherein the claim of deduction of u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act was denied, resulting in an addition of Rs.6,61,463/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld CIT(A) which was dismissed ex-parte qua assessee. Therefore, assessee is before us, pleading for one more opportunity before the Ld CIT(A).

4.

Per contra, the Ld.DR does not want us to give assessee one more innings to the assessee.

5.

Having heard both the parties and after perusal of records, we note that impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order qua assessee.

1. We note that the Ld.CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of appeal on merits as required u/s.250(6) of the Act. In such circumstances, for the ends of justice and fair play, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a (AY 2016-17) 4083 Pariyur Nanjagoundenpalayam- PACCS Ltd. direction to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be diligent and file relevant documents/written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue as per sub-section (6) of sec.250 of the Act.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on the 26th day of February, 2025, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →