DHATRIGRAM NIRALGACHI SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD,DHATRIGRAM BAZAR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 476/KOL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2022AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of the Section 80P deduction without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee was erroneous. Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative society, claimed a deduction under Section 80P in its return of income. This deduction was disallowed during the processing of the return under Section 143(1) without granting the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The appeal before the CIT(A) was also decided ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether a deduction under Section 80P can be disallowed in processing under Section 143(1) without granting a hearing. Whether an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘C(SMC

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE]

order

: May 26, 2022 ORDER

PER SONJOY SARMA, JM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘NFAC’] dated 20.03.2021 for A.Y. 2018-19.

2.

At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 170 days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of the said delay and keeping in view of the reasons therein, we satisfied that there is a sufficient cause for delay of 170 days on the part of the assessee in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and delay in filing the instant appeal is accordingly condoned.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds:

Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dhatrigram Niralgachi Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd. “i. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 80P in processing of return of income u/s 143(1) is wrong, erroneous, misconceived, arbitrary, excessive and deserves to be set aside / cancelled / annulled. ii. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the claim of deduction u/s 80P, amounting to Rs. 23,37,252/- cannot be disallowed/denied in processing of return of income without granting opportunity of hearing to assessee either in assessment stage or in first appeal, thereby rendering the orders of authorities below invalid, ab-initio void, illegal and rescindable. iii. For that the assessee craves leave to alter, add, amend, moderate, substitute or delete any one or more of the ground or grounds of appeal at any time before or in course of hearing of the appeal.”

4. The brief fact of the case is that appellant is a co- operative society registered under the West Bengal Co- operative societies Act, 1983. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 03.11.2018 declaring a total income at Nil. After declaring gross total income of Rs. 23,37,246/- and claiming the same amount as deduction under chapter VI-A of the I.T. Act. The AO vide an order dated 16.05.2019 passed u/s 143(1) determined the total income of the assessee of Rs. 23,37,250/- after disallowing the claim of deduction under chapter VI-A of the I.T. Act.

Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dhatrigram Niralgachi Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd.

5.

Aggrieved by the said order dated 16.05.2019, the assessee preferred an appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi which was dismissed on 20.03.2021.

6.

Aggrieved by the said order dated 20.03.2021, the assessee is in appeal before us.

7.

At the time of hearing, the ld. AR submitted before us that the claim of deduction u/s 80P amounting to Rs. 23,37,252/- cannot be disallowed denied in processing of return of income without granting opportunity of hearing to assessee either in assessment stage or before the 1st Appellate Authority. Therefore, orders of the authorities below void ab- initio. The ld. AR further submitted that the appellant assessee has requested before the ld. CIT(A) to file submission but did not get any opportunity to submit such submission before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee being decided ex-parte against the assessee.

8.

On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing on behalf of the revenue relied on the orders of the ld. CIT(A), we, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the case are of the considered view that since the order of the ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte and one more opportunity should be given to the assessee we in the Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dhatrigram Niralgachi Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd. interest of justice set aside the impugned order and remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue raised before us by way of speaking order, we also direct the assessee to remain vigilant in receiving the notice of hearing the ld. CIT(A) should not request for any adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause and should file all necessary documents so as to facilitate the ld. CIT(A) for passing the speaking order. Needless to mention that the assessee should be given proper opportunity of being heard.

9.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26th May, 2022.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →