KHUKURDAHA JAGANNATHPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. I.T.O., CIRCLE - 38,, PASCHIM MEDINIPUR

PDF

ITA 1815/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 October 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

Facts

The assessee, a cooperative society, deposited Rs. 79,80,000/- in bank during demonetization, which the Assessing Officer treated as unexplained money under Section 69A. There was also a disallowance of Rs. 5,84,339/- under Section 80P, as the assessee failed to provide evidence that its operations were confined to members. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

Held

The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, noting the assessee's claim of unavoidable circumstances for not producing evidence. The Assessing Officer is directed to re-examine the issues afresh after affording the assessee sufficient opportunity to present all necessary evidence and pass a speaking order.

Key Issues

Whether the deposit of Rs. 79,80,000/- during demonetization constitutes unexplained money under Section 69A and whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P given the lack of evidence that its operations were confined to members.

Sections Cited

250, 143(2), 142(1), 69A, 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

order

: October 17, 2025 ORDER

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.06.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee is a society and is engaged in the activities of accepting deposits under various schemes. The assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Nil for the year under consideration. Statutory notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) were issued but the assessee failed to respond. The Assessing Officer found that an amount of Rs.79,80,000/- was deposited by the assessee in bank during demonetization period. The Assessing Officer treated the said amount of Rs.79,80,000/- as unexplained money Khukurdaha Jagannathpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd u/s 69A of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld. AR instead of arguing on merits of the case only prayed that the matter be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration by giving opportunity to the assessee to place documents as the order passed by the Assessing Officer confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee failed to submit sufficient evidences to demonstrate that the operations were confined exclusively to the members. The ld. AR submits that the assessee is a cooperative society and he has sufficient documentary evidence to prove his case but due to some unavoidable circumstance the assessee could not able to produce supporting evidences.