SADBHAWANA GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(5), NAGPUR

On being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who also passed ex-parte order u/sec.144 of the Act by confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer in absence of any specific explanation with regard to source of cash deposited in it’s bank, in absence of return of income, addition made on account of Sec.80P deduction and expenses claimed.

Aggrieved by the order of the Learned CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal contending, inter alia, that the additions made by the 4 ITA.No.595/NAG./2024 Assessing Officer and sustained by the Learned CIT(A) are not in accordance with law and the authorities are not properly appreciated the explanation offered by the assessee and documents placed on record. He, accordingly, submitted that the additions sustained by the learned CIT(A) be deleted.

The Learned DR on the other hand strongly relied on the orders of the lower authorities. He submitted that the assessee is a society and it is the bounden duty of the society to file it’s return of income. Despite issuance of notices, the assessee society did not file it’s return income and therefore, the Assessing Officer was rightly made the impugned additions which have been sustained by the learned CIT(A) in absence of return of income and documentary evidence in support of it’s claim. He, accordingly, pleaded that the order of the learned CIT(A) be confirmed and the grounds raised

6. I have heard the rival submissions of both the parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and material on record. I find force in the arguments of the Learned DR. I note that the assessee is a society and as such, 5 ITA.No.595/NAG./2024 the assessee has to file return of income for the impugned assessment year 2017-2018. Despite issuance of statutory notices u/sec.142(1) and show cause notice u/sec.144 of the Act by the Assessing Officer, the assessee society did not chose to file it’s return of income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer made the impugned additions by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.40,93,777/- in absence of explanation from the side of the assessee society. Even during the appellate proceedings also the assessee did not furnish sufficient documentary evidence(s) with respect to the additions made by the Assessing Officer and, therefore, the learned CIT(A), had sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer vide his ex-parte order passed u/sec.144 of the Act. From the perusal of the orders of the authorities below, I note that the assessee is all along negligent in filing it’s return of income and in absence of such return, the learned CIT(A) sustained the addition made on account of sec.80P deduction and disallowed the expenses. Further the assessee society also not furnished source of cash deposit in bank account. In view of the above lackadaisical approach of 6 ITA.No.595/NAG./2024 the assessee-society in substantiating it’s case, I, find no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A) and I, accordingly, confirm the same. The grounds raised by the assessee-society are dismissed.

7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03.02.2025.