MSEB EMPLOYEE CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD JALNA,JALNA vs. ITO WARD 1 JALNA, JALNA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1685/PUN/2024
Assessment Year : 2018-19
MSEB Employee Cooperative
Credit Society Ltd. Jalna,
1, Shanta Govind Apartment,
Gandhi Chaman, Jalna 413 213
Maharashtra
PAN : AAAAM6294R
Vs.
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1, Jalna
Appellant
Respondent
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated
04.06.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 31.03.2021 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act.
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on account of delay in filing of the appeal. ldCIT(A) has dismissed the same in limine confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. He submitted that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee in filing of the appeal in time before ld.CIT(A). He submitted that given an opportunity the Appellant by : Shri Girish Ladda (Through Virtual) Respondent by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 25.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 14.07.2025 MSEB Employee Coop. Credit Society Ltd. Jalna
2
assessee shall furnish the documents before ld.CIT(A) to plead its case. Ld. Departmental Representative raised no objection if the matter is restored to the file of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed us. Assessee is a Cooperative society and assessment for A.Y. 2018-19 completed on 31.03.2021 u/s.143(3) r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act wherein the ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act at Rs.56,25,624/-. Assessee challenged the addition made by the AO before ld.CIT(A) but the appeal was time barred by limitation. A major portion of the delay deserves to be accepted as it was on account of covid-19 pandemic outbreak restrictions stretched upto May, 2022. We also further observe that the assessee is a Cooperate society located in a remote place and is claimed to be not well conversant with the income-tax portal and filing of the appeal. Therefore, it took some time to find proper counsel to deal with the matter. 4. Admittedly, in the present case, there is a delay of 1163 days in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A)/NFAC. Since major delay period includes Covid-19 pandemic outbreak, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC ought to have considered the same by virtue of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. Ld. DR has not brought out anything contrary to disbelieve the averments made by the assessee. In this regard, we would like to quote the decision of Hon’ble Juri ictional High Court in the case of MSEB Employee Coop. Credit Society Ltd. Jalna
3
Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) wherein delay of 2984 days was condoned. Hon’ble Court held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, negligent and his conduct is lacking in bonafides. Considering the given facts, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) and admit the appeal for adjudication.
5. In the light of above and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised in the instant appeal back to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for necessary adjudication, after duly considering the submissions/
evidences filed by the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act and also considering the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614
(Bombay) wherein it is held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order.
Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant about the notice of hearing and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause.
Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
MSEB Employee Coop.
Credit Society Ltd. Jalna
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 14th day of July, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 14th July, 2025. Satish
आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.
गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
//// Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.