INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BHANDARA, BHANDARA vs. BHANDARA ZILLA PRATHAMIK SHIKHAK SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD. , BHANDARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 201/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 June 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Despite the Departmental Representative's contention that the Commissioner erred in law by setting aside the assessment order under section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the Tribunal noted that the assessee made no compliance during the assessment proceedings, leading the Assessing Officer to make an assessment under section 144.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against an order dated 17/01/2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which remanded the issue of deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, back to the Assessing Officer. This remand was for a fresh decision after verifying documentary evidence not submitted during the assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the Commissioner erred in remanding the issue of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) to the AO for fresh verification when the assessee failed to provide necessary documents during assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 251(1)(a),Section 144,Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER

For Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale

Date of Hearing – 16/06/2025 Date of Order – 16/06/2025

O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M.

The aforesaid appeal by the assessee is against impugned order dated 17/01/2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [for short “learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2018–19.

In the instant case, vide impugned order dated 17/01/2025, the 2. Ld. Commissioner remanded the issue back qua the deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") to the file of Assessing Officer (for short, “A.O.") for decision afresh by verifying all the documentary evidences which were not submitted during the assessment

2 Bhandara Zilla Prathamik Shikhak Sahakari Samiti Ltd. ITA no.201/Nag./2025 proceedings, despite granting various opportunities by following the principles of natural justice. The learned Departmental Representative by this particular appeal and by raising the grounds of appeal has claimed that learned Commissioner has erred in law in setting aside the assessment order by taking revenge of the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act which are applicable to the assessment framed under section 144 of the Act but not the assessment framed under section 143(3) r/w section 143(3A) & section 143(3B) of the Act, as it appears from the caption of the assessment order.

3.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, though the contention raised by the ld.DR appears to be correct, however, from the body of the assessment order it appears that the assessee eventually made no compliance and, therefore, Assessing Officer was constrained to make the assessment under section 144 of the Act as duly acknowledged the said fact in para 13 of the assessment order, which is not denied by the learned D.R. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the Revenue Department stands dismissed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue Department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16/06/2025

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →