Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI
PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi for A.Y. 2017-18.
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and passed an order on ex parte basis without giving the assessee the opportunity of being heard. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case and assessed the total income at Rs. 1,21,85,900/- as against the returned income of Nil. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and made an addition of Rs. 1,21,85,900/- on account of deduction claimed under section 80P under chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as is admissible deduction to a co-operative society. The addition therefore made by the AO is totally wrong and without considering the facts of the case. 4. That the appellant craves to leave, add, alter or amend any of the ground at or before hearing.”
ITA No.400/Ind/2022 M/s. Indore Mandal Dak Tar Karamchari Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2 – 3. The assessee is co-operative credit society which is registered under Madhya Pradesh Credit Society which is registered under Madhya Pradesh Credit Society and is engaged in providing credit facility to its members. The assessee society i.e. Indore Mandal Daktar Karmachari Sahkarita Sanstha Maryadit filed its return of income for the period relevant to A.Y. 2017-18 on 30.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. Before declaring total income of Rs. NIL, the assessee society has claimed deduction u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs. 1,21,85,904/- out of gross total income of Rs. 1,21,85,904/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment for ‘Limited Purpose’ and subsequently statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, dated 27.09.2018 was served for the reasons as below:
(a) Large deduction under chapter VI-A from total income. (b) Low income in comparison to high loan/advances/investment in shares appearing in balance sheet (c) Low income in comparison to very high investments appearing in balance sheet (d) Tax credit claimed in ITR is less than the tax credit available in 26AS (verification of corresponding receipts/investment)
The assessee society furnished details and filed its reply from time to time. After taking cognizance of the same, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs. 1,21,85,904/- claimed as deduction by the assessee u/s 80P or 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
ITA No.400/Ind/2022 M/s. Indore Mandal Dak Tar Karamchari Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3 – 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The Ld. AR submitted that there is a delay of 23 days in filing the present appeal for which the condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee explaining the delay therein. The reasons given by the assessee appears to be genuine, hence the delay is condoned.
The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee for contesting the appeal. Therefore, the Ld. AR prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the appeal on merit after giving hearing to the assessee.
The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. From the perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it appears that the CIT(A) has issued notices of hearing on various dates but the service of the said notices to the assessee are not mentioned in the order. Further, it is observed that the CIT(A) has not given sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee at the appellate proceedings for presenting his case. The CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merit as well. Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues contested therein
ITA No.400/Ind/2022 M/s. Indore Mandal Dak Tar Karamchari Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 4 –
on merit as per law. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.
In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 10/03/2023 by placing the result on the Notice Board as per Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rule, 1963.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on /03/2023 Sd/- Sd/- SdSd Sd/- Sd/- (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 10/04/2023 TRUE COPY TANMAY, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील!य अ�धकरण,इंदौर/ DR, ITAT, Indore 6. गाड' फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Indore 1. Date of dictation 27.03.2023(Typed in her computer) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 27.03.2023 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .03.2023 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .03.2023 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S .03.2023 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk .03.2023 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order……………………………………