ACIT, CIR-1, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI vs. THE JALPAIGURI CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., JALPAIGURI

The relevant facts of the case giving rise to these appeals are that the assessments in the case of the assessee for both the years under consideration, i.e. A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10 were completed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) by taking the status of the assessee as a Cooperative Society. Subsequently it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that its status was mentioned by the assessee as “AOP” in the returns of income filed for both the years under consideration. He accordingly issued notices under section 154 and passed the rectification & 398/KOL./2015 Assessment years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Page 2 of 3 orders dated 11.09.2014 changing the status of the assessee from the Cooperative Society to AOP.

Against the orders passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154, appeals were preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals). During the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals), it was submitted by the assesese that its status is a Cooperative Society but the same was mentioned wrongly in the returns of income for the years under consideration as AOP instead of a Cooperative Society. It was also pointed out by the assessee that its status was continuously taken as a Cooperative Society by the Income Tax Department in other years. After considering this submission made by the assessee, the ld. CIT(Appeals) decided the issue vide paragraph no. 4 of his impugned order as under:- “It is seen that the assessee is treated as Cooperative Society by Income Tax Department in all other Ays. Assessee has been issued banking license by RBI in his status as Cooperative Society. The moment the assessee ceases to be a Cooperative Society, the license will lapse. It is purely a mistake while preparing the return of income that the status is mentioned as AOP. The AO is directed to call for the details from the assessee about his status and treat the assessee as per the status mentioned in the documents. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed”.

At the time of hearing before us, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. These appeals of the Revenue are, therefore, being disposed of ex-parte qua the respondent-assessee after hearing the arguments of the ld. D.R. and perusing the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the ld. CIT(Appeals) vide his impugned order has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee regarding its status being a Cooperative Society by calling for the relevant details and documents from the assessee and verifying the same. The ld. CIT(Appeals) thus has actually not decided the issue relating to the & 398/KOL./2015 Assessment years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Page 3 of 3 determination of the status of the assessee vide his impugned order and directed the Assessing Officer to decide the same after verifying the relevant details and documentary evidence. In our opinion, the Revenue thus cannot be said to have any real grievance arising from the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and even the ld. D.R. has fairly and frankly admitted the same, we, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and upholding the same, we dismiss these appeals filed by the Revenue.

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on June 21, 2017.