Suvarna Gramin Bigarsheti Sah. Pat Sanstha Maryadit Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Assessee, a co-operative credit society, filed appeal against CIT(A), NFAC order dated 02.05.2024 arising from assessment framed u/s 144. There was a delay of 242 days in filing appeal. Assessee explained that the impugned order was received in the email account of an ex-employee & was not communicated in time. Tribunal, relying on Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Katiji (1987) 2 SCC 107 & Inder Singh Vs State of MP (2025 INSC 382), condoned the delay holding that there was “reasonable cause.”
On merits, AO had made addition of ₹11,56,500/- u/s 68 on account of cash deposits during demonetisation (09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016). AO noted that Assessee, though engaged in co-operative credit activities & otherwise eligible for deduction u/s 80P, could not explain source of cash collected from Members during the banned currency period. CIT(A) confirmed addition holding that no proper details were filed.
Before Tribunal, Assessee produced a 120-page paper book containing KYC details, Aadhaar & mobile numbers of Members, branch-wise cash book entries & contended that once identity, creditworthiness of Members & genuineness of transactions are proved, s.68 cannot be invoked. Reliance was placed on ITAT Pune in ITO Vs Ambika Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha (ITA 1104/PUN/2023), Bhagur Urban Credit Co-op Society Ltd. Vs ITO (ITA 561/PUN/2022) & ITO Vs CD Patani Nagri Sah. Pat Sanstha (ITA 727/PUN/2022).
