DOIWALA KISAAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI,DOIWALA vs. ITO/DCIT/ACIT,CENTAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 235/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 February 2026AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRISANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance before the CIT(A) and, in the interest of substantial justice, set aside the impugned orders. The cases were remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with an expectation for the assessee to promptly present facts and for the CIT(A) to provide ample opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Doiwala Kisaan Sewa Sahkari Samiti, did not file income tax returns for AY 2018-19 and 2019-20, despite substantial cash deposits of Rs. 2.03 crores and Rs. 2.08 crores respectively. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 and made additions, denying relief under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) by invoking Section 80AC due to non-filing of returns.

What were the issues?

The key legal issues were the denial of deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) due to the non-filing of income tax returns within the statutory time limit, and the assessee's lack of compliance during the assessment and appellate proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 250,Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 80AC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US & SHRISANJAY AWASTHI

For Respondent: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.02.2026

आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This is a batch of two appeals of the same assessee for assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since the issues are mainly common to both the years, hence, these two appeals are being disposed of through a single order.

1.1 The present two appeals arise from the order dated 22.09.2025 for AY 2018-19, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”). The appeal for AY 2019- 20 arises from the order also dated 22.09.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Act by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.

& 235/DDN/2025 DOIWALA KISAAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI 1.2 In these cases, an adjournment application was received on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR.

2.

In these cases, it is seen that for both the years the assessee had not filed any return of income and it was noticed by the Revenue Authorities that substantial amounts of cash were deposited during the assessment years under consideration. Thus, Rs.203,64,871/- was deposited for AY 2018-19 and Rs.2.08 crores was deposited for AY 2019-20. Thereafter, the proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated and as a consequence the Ld. AO has made the impugned additions. It is seen that for both the years the assessee did not make any worthwhile compliance to the notices issued by the CIT(A) for hearing in the matter. We find that the fact of non-compliance before the CIT(A) is mentioned on page 3 of the impugned order for AY 2018-19 and on page 3 of the order for AY 2019-20.

2.1 For both the years the assessee has challenged the action of Ld. AO in denying relief u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act by invoking section 80AC of the Act on account of the fact that no return was filed for either of the years under consideration.

2.2 The Ld. DR pointed out that for claiming any deduction u/s 80P of the Act it was essential that a return of income needed to be filed within the statutory time limit. It was also pointed out that the assessee did not make any worthwhile presentation of facts before the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

We have considered the submissions of Ld. DR and have gone through the case records. We find that the assessee has suffered on account of non-compliance regarding the opportunities provided by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly in the interest of substantial justice, 2 & 235/DDN/2025 DOIWALA KISAAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the same back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. We would expect the assessee to be prompt in presenting the facts before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) would give ample opportunity of being heard.

4.

In the result, both these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.02.2026

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →