SHIVCHHTRAPATI CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 124/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHARI (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, remanding the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision on merits. The assessee was directed to cooperate and file necessary documents, with a warning against future leniency in case of default.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed a deduction of Rs. 8,63,256/- under section 80P of the Act. The assessee did not comply with the opportunities provided by the Ld. Commissioner, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution. The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be remanded for fresh adjudication on merits despite the assessee's failure to provide compliance to the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SMT. RENU JAUHARI

For Appellant: Shri Sushant N. Alme, A.R
For Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. DR

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 08.12.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2014-15.

2.

In the instant case, the Assessing Officer (AO) made the disallowance of Rs.8,63,256/- on account of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner though afforded various opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee made no compliance and therefore the Ld. Commissioner in the absence of relevant reply/documents was constrained to decide the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution and consequently dismissed the same in the absence of any evidence to rebut the assessment order. Though the conduct of the assessee do not seem to be reasonable and condonable, however, considering the peculiar facts that the Ld. Commissioner in the absence of relevant reply/documents failed to decide the appeal in its right perspective and proper manner and therefore for just decision of the case and for the ends of substantial justice, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on merits, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim.

3.

We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the appellate proceedings and to file the relevant submissions/documents which would be essential and required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the case. We clarify, in case of further default the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. Hence, the case is remanded accordingly.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2024.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →