NARMADA PRATHMIK UPBHOKTA SAHKARI BHANDAR MARYADIT,KHANDWA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, KHANDWA, KHANDWA

{
"clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No.81/Ind/2025\nAssessment Year:2018-19\nNarmada Prathmik\nUpbhokta Sahkari\nBhandar Maryadit,\nNarmada Prathmik\nSahakar, Narmada Nagar\nPunasa Khandwa\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nITO-1\nKhandwa\nबनाम /\nVs.\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN: AAAAN0220E\nAssessee by Shri Apurva Mehta and Shri Rajesh Mehta, ARs\nRevenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR\nDate of Hearing 18.08.2025\nDate of Pronouncement 19.08.2025\nआदेश / ORDER\nPer B.M. Biyani, A.M.:\nFeeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 29.11.2024 passed by\nlearned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)"] which\nin turn arises out of assessment-order dated 01.03.2023 passed by learned\nAssessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“AO"] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 &\n144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act"] for Assessment-Year ["AY"] 2018-19,\nthe assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal\nMemo (Form No. 36).\n2.\nLd. AR for assessee submits that the assessee is a consumer CO-\noperative society engaged in distribution of LPG connections of Bharat\nPetroleum (a Govt. of India undertaking) to the labourers in Narmada Nagar\nwhere a Hydel Project of 1000 MW is erected on river Narmada in Khadwa\nDistrict. For the relevant AY 2018-19, the assessee's case was taken for\nassessment u/s 147 on the basis of information available with the AO as to\nthe cash deposits of Rs. 1,59,28,227/- in bank a/c of assessee and interest\nof Rs. 1,37,118/- earned by assessee; both aggregating to Rs. 1,60,65,345/-.\nFor assessment of assessee, the AO issued various notices u/s\n148/142(1)/144 but the assessee-society was having a part time accountant\nwho did not have any access to the email of assessee-society and the notices\nsent by AO could not be attended. The assessee could only file the return of\nincome lastly on 20.02.2023 after receiving a verbal communication from\nIncome-tax Department [the details of return so filed are available in\nColumn 8.1 of the Form No. 35 filed to CIT(A)]. The AO, however, passed ex-\nparte assessment-order on 01.03.2023 u/s 144 with the remark as return\n\"Not filed” and assessing total income at Rs. 1,60,65,345/- [Para 4 of\nassessment-order]. The assessee was not even aware of the assessment-\norder having been passed by AO for the very same reason of part time\naccountant and hence there occurred a delay of 121 days in filing first-\nappeal to CIT(A). The CIT(A), however, was kind enough in condoning the\ndelay considering the assessee's case judiciously. Thereafter, the CIT(A)\nissued five notices to assessee [Para 7.1 of impugned order] but the\nassessee could comply only first notice dated 16.04.2024 [Para 5.0 of\nimpugned order] and could not comply rest of the four notices because the\nassessee supplied email id: narmadagasagency@gmail.com in Form No. 35\nbut the CIT(A) sent notices to email id: salary16knw1617@gmail.com /\ndajhawar@hotmail.com. To demonstrate this, Ld. AR has filed copies of\nnotices dated 09.09.2024 & 24.09.2024 issued by CIT(A). Therefore, the\nCIT(A) has dismissed assessee's first-appeal for non-prosecution and upheld\nAO's order in absence of representation by assessee. However, the assessee\nis having all documents in possession, primarily in the form of Audit report,\nAudited accounts, Ledger statement of Bharat Petroleum, Bank statement,\netc. to explain the deposits in its bank a/c. The assessee is ready to produce\nthese documents to the AO and explain the sources of deposits if an\nopportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded\nto AO for adjudication afresh after examining of assessee's evidences.\n3. Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a\nrequest to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do not\nseek unnecessary adjournments.\n4.\nConsidering above submissions of parties; having regard to the\nprinciple of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would\nbe caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of AO, we\nremand this matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk\nand responsibility of assessee. The AO shall give necessary opportunity of\nhearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his\nearlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure\nparticipation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek\nunnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass\nappropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.\n5. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.\nOrder pronounced in open court on 19/08/2025\n \n(PARESH M. JOSHI)\nJUDICIAL MEMBER\n \n(B.M. BIYANI)\nACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nIndore\nदिनांक / Dated : 19/08/2025\nPatel/Sr. PS\nCopies to: (1) The appellant\n(2) The respondent\n(3) CIT\n(4) CIT(A)\n(5) Departmental Representative\n(6) Guard File\nBy order\nSr. Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore",
"summary": {
"facts": "The assessee, a consumer cooperative society, was subjected to assessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2018-19 due to cash deposits and interest earned. The AO passed an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144 as the assessee's part-time accountant could not attend to notices sent to incorrect email addresses. This led to a delay in filing the first appeal.",
"held": "The Tribunal held that restoring the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication would serve the principle of natural justice and would not cause prejudice to the revenue. The AO is directed to provide a fresh opportunity of hearing to the assessee.",
"result": "Partly Allowed",
"sections": [
"147",
"144",
"144B",
"148",
"142(1)"
],
"issues": "Whether the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO, in absence of proper opportunity to the assessee due to communication issues, should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication."
}
}