TORENOORU VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA BANK LTD,KODAGU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD , MADIKERI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 874/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 January 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the assessee's plea for an opportunity of hearing before the AO and the lack of proper participation before the NFAC, decided to remit the entire issue back to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Torenooru Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd., appealed against an order of the NFAC for AY 2017-18. The original assessment order was passed ex-parte under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard and whether the AO/NFAC erred in treating cash deposits as unexplained and denying deductions under Chapter VIA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250,Section 69A,Section 80AC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri Prasanna N. Urala, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Subramnian S., D.R
Hearing: 25.01.2024Pronounced: 25.01.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Torenooru Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd. Somwarpet TQ ITO Vs. Kodagu 571 232 Ward Karnataka Madikeri PAN NO : AAAAT6737G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Prasanna N. Urala, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Subramnian S., D.R. Date of Hearing : 25.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.01.2024 O R D E R

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 11.9.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

1. The impugned order is opposed to law and facts of the case in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the appellant.

2. The impugned order is illegal, bad and nullity at law in as much as it was passed in haste and sufficient opportunity was not afforded to the appellant. Thus, the impugned order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

3. Without prejudice to ground 1 and 2, the NFAC ought to have decided the case on merits based on the statement of facts and grounds of appeal furnished in the form 35 of the appeal memo.

4. The NFAC erred in confirming the order of the ld. AO wherein he had treated the cash deposited by the appellant as unexplained Torenooru Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd., Kodagu Page 2 of 3 money and in doing so he failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 69A could not have been applied in as much as the appellant had proper explanations for the impugned deposits.

5. The NFAC erred in upholding the denial of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act by the ld. AO by invoking section 80AC and in doing so he failed to appreciate that the said provision was brought into force under the Finance Act, 2018 w.e.f. 1.4.2018 and are not applicable for the assessment year under appeal.

2.

In this case, assessment order was passed u/s 144 of the Act. Before NFAC also there was no proper participation even though notices have been given to the assessee as below: S.No. Notice issue Date of Response of appellant date (through compliance ITBA) 1. 24.05.2023, 08.06.2023, No written submission 10.08.2023, 21.08.2023, filed in support of 22.08.2023 and 29.08.2023 and grounds of appeal. No 30.08.2023 06.09.2023 request of adjournment made.

2.1 Before us, ld. A.R. pleaded for an opportunity of hearing before ld. AO. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the request of the assessee, we are inclined to remit the entire issue to the file of ld. AO for fresh consideration. The assessee shall cooperate with the department and present the case properly, if he fails to do so, the ld. AO is at liberty to take appropriate view on this matter.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th Jan, 2024

Sd/- Sd/- (Beena Pillai) (Chandra Poojari) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated 25th Jan, 2024. VG/SPS

Torenooru Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd., Kodagu Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →