K864 MURALI CHENNAMPATTI PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,ERODE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1),ERODE, ERODE
Page - 1 - of 3
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,’डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3058/Chny/2024
निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2017-18
K864
Murali
Chennampatti
Primary
Agricultural
Co-op
Credit Society,
Murali, Murali Post,
Anthiyur Thaluk,
Erode Dist, Tamil Nadu-638504
[PAN: AABAK3671M]
Vs.
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-2(1),
Erode.
(अपीलधर्थी/Appellant)
(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by :
Ms.Vijayalakshmi, C.A,
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by :
Shri Eswaran, JCIT
सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing
:
22.01.2025
घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
24.01.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order
No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069276918(1) dated 30.09.2024 of the Learned
Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal
Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2017-18. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 30.09.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
Page - 2 - of 3
0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the penalty order u/s 271B dated 24.08.2022 and that the appeal was dismissed for being filed late without any justified grounds. It was pleaded that the assesse had committed delay of about 341 days and for which it had justified grounds. It was stated that the assessee is primary agricultural cooperative credit society and that the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Audit Department, Erode is its statutory auditor. The delay was caused in filing of appeal as the secretary was held up in completion of its statutory audit which in turn caused the delay before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel submitted the matter may be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication on its merits and that it shall make full compliance to the notices of Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR placed reliance upon the authorities below. 3.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is trite law that no litigant benefits by non-prosecution of its case. We find sufficient force in the pleadings of the assesse as to why it could not file its appeal in time before the Ld. First Appellate Authority. We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of delayed filing by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case. 4.0 We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the case is set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after giving opportunities of being heard to the assesse and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay of 341 days in filing of appeal in this case. He will be at liberty to call for any remand report from the Ld. AO if warranted by the facts of the case. The assesse shall be bound to comply to all Page - 3 - of 3
the notices and details called by the Ld. CIT(A). Any non-compliance from the assesse side shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority and direct him to readjudicate the matter de novo.
Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.
5.0
In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 24th , January-2025 at Chennai. (जॉजज जॉजज के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाध्यक्ष / Vice President (श्री अममताभ शुक्ला)
(AMITABH SHUKLA)
लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member
चेन्नई/Chennai, ददनांक/Dated: 24th , January-2025. KB/-
आदेश की प्रततमलपप अग्रेपित/Copy to:
1. अपीलार्थी/Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent
3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Coimbatore
4. पवभागीय प्रतततनधि/DR
5. गाडज फाईल/GF