Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jabalpur
Vrahattakar Seva Sahkari Sameeti, ... vs National Faceless Assessment Center, ... on 15 May, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH, MP
BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT
AND
SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.: 121/JAB/2023 For Assessment Year: 2018-2019
Vrahattakar Seva Sahkari Sameeti, Maryaditya,
Hoshangabad, MP-461223.
PAN No. AABAV5239Q . . . . . . . Appellant
V/s
National Faceless e-Assessment Centre,
Delhi . . . . . . . Respondent
Represented
Assessee by: Mr Ayush Gupta ['Ld. AR']
Revenue by: Mr N.M. Prasad ['Ld. DR']
Date of conclusive Hearing : 14/05/2026
Date of Pronouncement : 15/05/2026
ORDER
PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI;
The DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/10531364(1) dt. 24/05/2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ['Ld. NFAC'] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['the Act'] which in turn dealt with assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act by National Faceless e-Asstt. Centre, Delhi ['Ld. AO'] anent to assessment year 2018-19 ['AY' hereinafter] is challenged by the captioned assessee by the present appeal.
ITAT-Jabalpur Page 1 of 6
Vrahattakar Seva Sahakari Sameeti, Maryaditya Vs NFeAC ITA No. 121/JAB/2023 AY: 2018-19
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that; the assessee is a Co-operative society deriving income from trading business of wholesale agricultural produce/raw material and also engaged in other financial intermediary services. The assessee filed its return of income on 30/03/2019 declaring NIL income after claiming deduction u/c VI-A of the Act for sum of ₹5,74,188/-. The case of the assessee is selected for complete scrutiny vide notice dt. 28/09/2019 issued u/s 143(2) of the Act. When the assessee failed to comply with scrutiny notice, the Ld. AO provided further opportunities vide multiple notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act on 29/01/2020, 06/03/2020 and 24/08/2020 which were also not responded. Adhering to principle of natural justice, 'no-response' letter was also issued on 09/10/2020 for compliance however same went futile. In the event, assessment proceedings were conducted ex-parte and culminated vide order dt. 26/04/2021 u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3), (3A) & (3B) of the Act, wherein claim for chapter VI-A deduction for sum of ₹5,74,188/- was denied and further ITAT-Jabalpur Page 2 of 6 Vrahattakar Seva Sahakari Sameeti, Maryaditya Vs NFeAC ITA No. 121/JAB/2023 AY: 2018-19 additions on twin account was made viz; (1) interest of ₹68,83,156/- paid to others/outsiders remained unexplained were disallowed & brought to tax u/s 69C of the Act and (2) expenses of ₹27,09,879/- remained unexplained were also brought to tax u/s 69C of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment an appeal thereagainst u/s 246A r.w.s. 249 was filed before Ld. NFAC which came to be dismissed ex-parte.
3. Aggrieved by the actions of both the tax authorities and by the impugned order, the assessee filed the present appeal.
4. Without touching grounds of appeal the Ld. AR Mr Gupta at the outset of physical hearing submitted that, the assessment proceedings were conducted during the subsistence of COVID-19 pandemic, where owning to restriction the assessee was displaced with necessary support & facilities, therefore no effective compliance was made. In the absence of evidence & necessary documents, the assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. It was further submitted that, in ITAT-Jabalpur Page 3 of 6 Vrahattakar Seva Sahakari Sameeti, Maryaditya Vs NFeAC ITA No. 121/JAB/2023 AY: 2018-19 first appeal through documents were filed as additional evidence but owing to non-availability of effective assistant, matter could not be represented effectively. Thus, both proceedings were completed without evidence & explanations.
5. The Ld. AR however candidly accepted that, the ex-parte proceedings are attributable to assessee's failure. It was prayed that, since the proceedings did not determine rights & liabilities of rival parties conclusively, therefore one more opportunity is to be granted to adduce necessary documents/evidences and submitting satisfactory explanations against the negative observation made by the Ld. AO. With the prayer for remand, the assessee also undertaken to co-operate with proceedings on remand. Per contra, the Ld. DR could hardly object the remand request for de-novo proceedings.
6. Heard rival submissions on limited issue of ex-parte assessment and ex-parte first appellate proceedings and subject to rule 18 of the ITAT-Rules, 1963 perused material placed on ITAT-Jabalpur Page 4 of 6 Vrahattakar Seva Sahakari Sameeti, Maryaditya Vs NFeAC ITA No. 121/JAB/2023 AY: 2018-19 record. We note that, neither in the course of assessment nor in the course of first appellate proceedings there was any evidence or submission. It is an admitted fact that, the assessee's non-cooperation and non-prosecution constrained the tax authorities to proceed ex-parte and culminate the proceedings without evidence. The reasons of non-prosecution of assessment proceedings is apparently attributable to restriction placed by COVID-19 pandemic, as not only the notices but the order of assessment itself passed during pandemic outbreak. Before the Ld. NFAC the appellant submitted documents & written statements as additional evidences, which suggestive to have admitted without complying the provisions of rule 46A of IT-Rules, 1962. This being the factual position, therefore it is deemed fit to accept the assessee's plea for de-novo assessment on remand. And we decide so because, the assessment as well as the appellate proceedings were conducted in complete absence of cogent evidences, material and assistance from the appellant assessee. ITAT-Jabalpur Page 5 of 6
Vrahattakar Seva Sahakari Sameeti, Maryaditya Vs NFeAC ITA No. 121/JAB/2023 AY: 2018-19
7. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 'CIT Vs Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd.' [2015, 231 Taxman 384 (Del)] held that, where any assessment is completed in absence of evidences or submissions etc., an appellate authority having noticed such lack of evidences etc., are duty bound to remit case for proper verification & for fresh assessment. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court also laid a similar ratio in 'Sharda Domestic Fuels (P) Ltd. Vs State of MP' [2013, 32 Taxmann.com 416 (MP) & 59 VST 176 (MP)]. Respectfully following these judicial precedents (supra), without commenting on merits, for the same reasoning we set-aside the impugned order for its remand to Ld. AO for verification of issues in the light of evidence & for framing fresh assessment.
8. In result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. U/r 34 of ITAT Rules, this order is pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned herein above.
-S/d- -S/d-
KUL BHARAT G. D. PADMAHSHALI
VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.अपीलार्थी / The Applicant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT, Jabalpur
4. DR, ITAT, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur 5.गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File.
By Order
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Jabalpur.
ITAT-Jabalpur Page 6 of 6