DUDKOMRA SREEBORA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNYAN SAMITY LTD., PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR. 38, MIDNAPURE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1476/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1476/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dudkomra Sreebora Samabay Krishi Unnyan Samity Ltd…….Appellant [PAN: AACAD 3011 B] Vs. ACIT, Cir.-38, Midnapure………….……...................................Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by: Amit Agrawal, Adv. And Saurabh Majumdar, CA. Department represented by: Supriyo Pal, Addl. CIT. Date of concluding the hearing : August 8th, 2024 Date of pronouncing 4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the case to the file of the AO. The assessee was directed to submit all relevant documents to the AO for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative society, declared NIL income and claimed deductions. The AO assessed total income at Rs. 46,68,598/- due to non-compliance with notices and unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 45 lakhs. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order, dismissing the assessee's grounds.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal without considering the documents submitted before the ITAT, and whether the cash deposits were adequately explained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SRI RAJESH KUMAR & PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY

For Appellant: Adv. And Saurabh Majumdar, CA

order

: October 21st, 2024 ORDER

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2017-18 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 07.11.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 23.11.2019. 1.1. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee as claimed that they are Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society registered under West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 carrying on business of I.T.A. No.: 1476/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dudkomra Sreebora Samabay Krishi Unnyan Samity Ltd. providing KCC loans to the members, SHG loans and carrying on business of banking with its former member by maintaining all rules and regulations. The assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. at 'NIL'. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and show cause notice has been issued to the assessee as the assessee in its return of income computed the gross total income to the tune of Rs. 1,68,598/- which is less than 8% of gross receipts of Rs. 28,67,409/- as shown in the income tax return. The assessee claimed the whole amount as deduction under Chapter 6A for Rs. 1,68,598/- in spite of said notices and the show cause, there was no compliance by the assessee as a result of which the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ld. 'AO') assessed the total income at Rs. 46,68,598/-. The assessee has challenged the said order before the ld. CIT(A) thereby saying that the assessee Society situated in the remote village not used in electronic media, e-mail etc. and he did not receive any notice issued by the ld. AO. The ld. CIT(A) did not consider the submission of the assessee with regard to the non-service of the notices and dismissed his ground. Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the ground of the assessee for deduction of Rs. 1,68,598/-. The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appellant failed to furnish the source of the deposits. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred.

2.

Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee being agricultural Society do not have any access to electronic media and e- mail etc. Therefore, he could not be able to furnish the documents before the ld. AO with regard to his claim. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed papers which are as follows: 1) Partywise details of Cash Received from members totaling to Rs.45,56,237/- 2) Notarised Affidavit cum Declaration of 15 Number of Depositors along with their PAN, Aadhar card copies and Bank Ledger copies

Page 2 of 4 I.T.A. No.: 1476/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dudkomra Sreebora Samabay Krishi Unnyan Samity Ltd. 2.1. He has also brought the member list of cash deposits during the demonetization period, bank account statement of TGCCB where amounts are deposited, audit report for AY 2017-18, registration certificate etc. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the documents which have been sought by the ld. AO with regard to the claim of the assessee could not be filed before the ld. AO as the assessee has not been served any notices. The prayer of the appellant is that he has given an opportunity to place all those facts before the ld. AO as he is a primary agricultural Society and he has documents party- wise details of cash receipts. We have perused the order of the ld. AO and find that there was non-compliance of the assessee for the notices sent by the ld. AO as a result of which an amount of Rs. 45 Lakh deposited into the bank account of the assessee treated to be remained unexplained. Hereinafter, the assessee has filed party-wise details of cash receipts which has to be looked into. We have also gone through the order of the ld. CIT(A) and find that ld. CIT(A) in its order has held thus: “7.6 The assessment order in this case was passed on 23.11.2019. One of the major additions was cash deposited during the demonetization period of Rs.45,00,000/- by treating the same as unexplained money. The appellant failed to respond to any of the notices issued by the AO. They have claimed in their grounds of appeal that those deposits were received from the members only. If they have maintained such details and KYC particulars of each member, who allegedly deposited cash, they could have provided such information, the moment they received the first hearing notice. In the present case, in spite of providing multiple opportunities by the AO and the appellate authority, they were only seeking further time without producing those basic details in support of their contention. The appellant ought to have furnished complete details of identity of each person from whom they received those money and deposited into the Bank account either before the AO or before the appellate authority. In the absence of such basic details, forthcoming from the appellant, the action of the AO, treating the sum as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act is upheld and the grounds taken are dismissed.”

3. Keeping in view the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) as well as the ld. AO and the documents filed by the assessee before us, we are inclined to pass an order by giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all those papers before the ld. AO with regard to his claim. Accordingly, the order passed by the ld.

Page 3 of 4 I.T.A. No.: 1476/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dudkomra Sreebora Samabay Krishi Unnyan Samity Ltd. CIT(A) as well as ld. AO are hereby set aside, the case is restored to the file of the ld. AO. The assessee is hereby directed to place all those papers before the ld. AO with regard to his claim and the ld. AO shall pass an order after hearing the assessee.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →