K 2080 P KARIAMPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,COIMBATORE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 856/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 July 2024AY 2017-2018Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A) to be bonafide due to not checking emails. Therefore, the appeal was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee agricultural cooperative credit society filed a return of Nil income. The AO added interest income from investments as income from other sources. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) despite notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-appearance was justified, and if the assessee had a bonafide reason for non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 56

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 03.07.2024Pronounced: 05.07.2024

O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member ) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060254308(1) dated

1.

- 2 - 30.01.2024 for assessment year 2017-2018. The assessment was framed by the ITO, Non Corporate Ward 3(2), Coimbatore, for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 24.12.2019.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that appellant filed its return of income on 28.03.2018 admitting Nil income. Subsequently, the case was selected for Limited Scrutiny under CASS. Reason for limited scrutiny was i) Expenses incurred for earning exempt income ii) Investments/advances/loans. The AO framed assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 24.12.2019 and added interest income of Rs.1,11,83,161/- from surplus fund invested in Short Term deposits and securities of CDCC Bank & other financial institutions. The AO treated the same as their own sources income u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2017- 18. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A)sent four notices to appellant but assessee failed to appear before him hence, ld.CIT(A) upheld the AO order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, by the order of the ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

3.

We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly, assessee did not appear before the ld.CIT(A). The ld. Counsel stated that assessee did not check the emails. Hence there is bonafide reason for non-appearance before ld.CIT(A). We find

- 3 - that non-appearance before ld.CIT(A) bonafide. Hence, in the interest of justice we set aside this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) to do fresh adjudication of appeal in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of the appeal on merits.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 5th day of July, 2024 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 56

All 1,790 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →