SULUR PANCHAYAT UNION EMPLOYEES TEACHERS CO-OP. THRIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,SULUR vs. ITO, NCW-4(1),, COIMBATORE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the orders of the AO and CIT(A) were passed ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and remitted the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed its return showing Nil income after claiming deduction u/s 80P. The AO issued notices u/s 143(2) which were not complied with, leading to an order u/s 144 disallowing the deduction. The CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal after issuing notices that were not complied with.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunity to present their case before the lower authorities, and if not, whether the case should be remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 24.07.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 15.12.2022.
There is a delay of 31 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.
The assessee has filed condonation petition stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is condoned accordingly.
The assessee has filed its return of income on 09.03.2022 by showing total income at Nil after claiming deduction u/s. 80P of the Act of Rs. 33,23,796/-. The A.O has issued various notices u/s. 143(2) of the Act which remain not complied and therefore, the A.O passed order u/s. 144 of the Act disallowing the claim u/s. 80P of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has issued three notices from 05.12.2023 to 20.06.2024, but there is no compliances to the notices and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee before us has contended that sufficient opportunity was not provided to the assessee either before A.O or before Ld. CIT(A) and both the orders have been passed ex-pare and therefore the case may be remitted back to the A.O for fresh consideration in the interest of justice.
The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the orders of A.O as well as Ld. CIT(A), we find that the orders have been passed ex-parte for the non- compliance by the assessee. The Ld. A.R has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore the case may be remanded back to the A.O for adjudication on merits. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the A.O. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the A.O to adjudicate this appeal afresh in accordance with law, after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. We also direct the Assessee to appear before the A.O on the date of hearing without fail and furnish complete details for his fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 20th December, 2024.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026