LOKMANYA GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT SANLI,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD5 SANGLI, SANGLI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2261/PUN/2024
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2018-19

Lokmanya
Gramin
Bigar
Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha
Maryadit,
AT Post 1, Kameri, Walwa,
Sangli- 415403. PAN : AABAL0364J
Vs. ITO, Ward-5, Sangli.
Appellant

Respondent

आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a cooperative society providing credit facilities to its members and has not filed its return of income for the period under consideration. On the basis of information that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.7,47,10,709/-
Assessee by : Shri Sarang Gudhate
Revenue by : Shri Chandra Vijay

Date of hearing
: 22.01.2025
Date of pronouncement : 28.03.2025
2
and also made cash withdrawal of Rs.8,17,17,639/- and also made time deposit of Rs.2,04,30,555/- in different bank accounts maintained by the assessee society but return of income has not been furnished for the relevant period, show cause notice u/s 148A(b) was issued to the assessee and since the assessee failed to file any reply against the above notice, order u/s 148A(d) was passed by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and notice u/s 148 and 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee. Since the assessee neither furnished reply nor furnished its return of income in response to notice u/s 148, the assessment was completed u/s 147
r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act on a total income of Rs.10,05,48,940/-.

The above assessed income includes unexplained money u/s 69A of Rs.6,24,88,224/- and unexplained investments u/s 69 of Rs.3,69,21,340/- and undisclosed interest income as income from other sources of Rs.11,39,379/-. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
3. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified.
3
Ld. AR submitted before the Bench that the appeal has been decided ex-parte i.e. without hearing to the assessee. Ld. AR further submitted before the Bench that the notices could not be seen by the authorized representative whose email ID was mentioned on the income tax portal. Ld. AR further submitted before the Bench that at least one opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee to appear before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC so that he can substantiate/support the grounds of appeal. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further requested to remand the matter back to his file to decide the appeal afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
4. Ld. DR appearing from the sides of the Revenue supported the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.
5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. We find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. It was the sole grievance of the counsel of the assessee that proper opportunity was not provided to the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. In this regard, we find that Ld.
4
CIT(A)/NFAC has provided proper opportunity to the assessee but since the dates of hearing were not informed to the assessee by the person whose email ID was mentioned on the income tax portal, the assessee could not furnish any reply before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. We find that the assessee is a cooperative society providing credit facilities to its members and during the course of its business has earned interest from other cooperative societies and also made time deposit with other cooperative banks. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that proper opportunity was not allowed to the assessee. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce documents/evidences in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC
5
shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 28th day of March, 2025. (MANISH BORAD)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 28th March, 2025. Sujeet
आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.

////
Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.