KPSPL 76 VALARPURAM PACCS LTD.,,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KANCHIPURAM

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017- 18. 2. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer found cash deposits in the accounts of the assessee during demonetization period.

Before us, the ld. AR Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate, referring to the computation sheet attached to the assessment order, submits that the assessee filed proper reply and records such as books of account, cash book, etc. against the notice under section 142(1) of the Act and after scrutinization of books of accounts, the Assessing Officer accepted the claim of deduction of ₹.46,31,555/- under section 80P of the Act. He vehemently argued that despite furnishing details of date- wise, person-wise cash deposit, the Assessing Officer erred in making addition under section 69A of the Act.

The ld. DR Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).

After hearing both the parties, we note that the assessee is a co- operative society and no return of income filed for the year under consideration. The assessee filed return of income on 07.11.2019 in response to the notice by making a claim under section 80P of the Act. By filing copy of audit certificate, cash book during demonetization period, etc., the main contention of the ld. AR is that when the assessee filed various details such as books of account, cash book, etc. against the notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act and after considering the books of accounts, etc., the Assessing Officer accepted the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and concluded the assessment under section 144 of the Act is not correct without affording adequate opportunity of being heard in respect of addition under section 69A of the Act. He also submits that the assessee is ready to furnish all the details before the Assessing Officer if this Tribunal afford an opportunity to the assessee. We note that as per income computation based on the assessment order, the assessee was allowed deduction under section 80P of the Act, but, an amount of ₹.12,20,000/- was added under the head income from ‘other sources’ under section 69A of the Act on account of unexplained money, which is clear from page 3 of the assessment order. Admittedly, as it was not disputed by the ld. DR that there was no opportunity for the assessee during the course of assessment proceeding in this respect and taking into account the undertaking as given by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee for furnishing all details, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, before the Assessing Officer. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.