THE THANESAR CO-OP MARKETING CUM PROCESSING SOCIETY LIMITED,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA.
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI,
PER PARESH M. JOSHI, JM
This is an appeal filed by the assessee under Section
253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as and by way of second
appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by
the order bearing No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-
25/1064010515(1) dated 09.04.2024 passed by ld. CIT(A)
under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is
hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The
ITA 640/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 2 relevant assessment year is 2021-22 and the
corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2020 to
31.03.2021.
The assessee in Form 36 which is Form of Appeal to
this Tribunal has raised following grounds of appeal
against the impugned order :
That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is against (he law and facts of the case. 2. That the Learned CIT(A) has passed the order u/s 250 on 09.04.2024 without considering the documents, evidence, paperbooks and written submissions filed and uploaded by assessee appellant, on the Income Tax E-portal on 21.03-2024 and 23.03.2024 itself in appeal proceedings, and CIT(A) passed the order by wrongly holding that there is non-compliance of appeal on the part of assessee which is factually incorrect and in complete violation of Principles of Natural Justice. 3. That the Learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in not deciding the appeal on the merits of the case and is not justified in passing in limine, ex parte order in a hastily manner & not on merits & totally non speaking order and without considering Grounds of appeal and the complete compliance and paperbooks duly uploaded and submitted by assessee on 21.03.2024 and 23.03.2024 on the Income Tax E-portal in appeal proceedings. 4. That the Id. CIT(A) has erred in passing the exparte order by illegally upholding the exparte order of Ld. AO, confirming the addition of Rs.16,5 1,85,360/- on account of alleged bogus purchases which addition is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing the exparte order by illegally upholding the exparte order of Ld- AO, confirming the addition of Rs.16,5 1,85,360/- on account of alleged bogus
ITA 640/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 3 purchases which addition is against the FCC facts and circumstances of the case. 6. That the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in passing the exparte order by illegally upholding the exparte order of ld. AO confirming the addition of Rs.16,51,85,360/- on account of alleged bogus purchases without considering that assessee is a cooperative society working on behalf of HAFED, NAFED etc. and all the purchases are genuine and legitimate duly supported by the documents and evidences as submitted by the assessee on 21.03.2024 and 23.03.2024 on the Income Tax E-portal in appeal proceedings. 7. That the Id. CTT (A) has erred in passing the cxparte order by illegally upholding the rejection of duly audited books of accounts and confirming the adhoc GP rate of 8% by the l.d. AO without considering the paperbooks and submissions of the assessee appellant. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend, die grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.
The order of assessment of ld. AO bears No.
ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2022-23/1048077459(1) and is
dated 19.12.2022 which was passed under Section
143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein
total income of the assessee was computed as
Rs.16,51,85,360/-. During the year under
consideration the assessee is a Society and was
engaged in sale and purchase of wheat, paddy,
pesticide, sunflower and fertilizers. The case of the
ITA 640/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 4 Society was selected under CASS to examine the
following issue :
i) Assessee has made substantial purchases from suppliers who are either non-filer(s) or have filed non-business ITR (ITR 1,2) or reflected a substantially lower turnover in ITR.
The notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) were
issued on five occasions but assessee never complied
with it fully. Hence, above assessment order was
passed under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act,
1961.
The assessee challenged the aforesaid order under
Section 243A by filing first appeal before ld. CIT(A) who
by impugned order has dismissed the appeal on the
ground that from 03.08.2023 to 21.03.2024 in
aggregate six notices were issued as and by way of
opportunities to explain their case but of no avail.
Hence, impugned order was passed exparte.
ITA 640/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 5 6. The hearing in the matter took place before this
Tribunal on 09.12.2024 when ld. AR has placed on
record of this Tribunal a brief preliminary synopsis
basis which it was contended that on portal, all replies
and documents were uploaded in support of their
submissions on 21.03.2024 and on 23.03.20224 and
relevant screen shots are placed on record. The ld.
CIT(A) has wrongly recorded in impugned order in para
5.4.4 as follows :-
“5.5.4 From the perusal of above submission of the appellant it is observed that the appellant has not provided any information or details sought specifically vide notice dated 21.03.2024.”
Basis above, it was contended that impugned order
is in violation of principle of natural justice, bad in law
and illegal. It should be set aside by this Tribunal. Per
contra, ld. DR has fairly agreed with the submissions
made by the ld. AR.
In the premises, we are of the considered opinion
that the impugned order is indeed bad in law and
ITA 640/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 6
illegal. It is passed in violation of the principles of
natural justice. We, accordingly, set aside the
impugned order and remand the case back to ld. CIT(A)
to pass a fresh order on merits of the case which
should be well reasoned and speaking. We direct
assessee to co-operate with the Department.
In result, appeal of assessee is allowed as and by
way of remand on denovo basis to pass a fresh order.
Appeal of assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 16.12.2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(KRINWANT SAHAY) ( PARESH M. JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
