Income Tax Assessment Order passed without considering Written Submission of Assessee: Kerala HC sets aside Assessment Order against Co operative Bank [Read Order]

In a single judge verdict the Kerala High Court set aside Income Tax assessment order passed without considering written submission of the assessee.

The petitioner assessee, Poomkulam Service Co Operative Bank submitted their return on 08.03.2019, whereas the deadline for filing was 28.02.2019, resulting in a delay of 7 days. To address this, the petitioner applied under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act seeking condonation for the delay. The petitioner received a notice on 27.10.2023, informing them of a hearing scheduled on 07.11.2023 at 11.30 a.m. before the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax ( Hqrs./Tech ), Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala. They were advised to attend in person or through an authorized representative, and were permitted to submit written submissions, which were to be considered in deciding on the application for condoning the 7-day delay. The petitioner duly filed written submissions on 03.11.2023. However, the impugned order was issued without recognizing the submission of written evidence, falsely stating that neither the petitioner appeared in person nor submitted the written submissions. This conclusion appears prima facie incorrect based on the provided report.

Assessee contended that they are a primary agricultural credit society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The assessee also claims that they are  engaged in the business of banking and providing credit facilities only to its members.

Revenue contended that the assessee was directed to appear either in person or through an authorised representative. The petitioner was given a liberty to file written submission which was to be taken into consideration before deciding upon the application for condoning the delay of 7 days in filing the return. Revenue pointed out that the assessee did not appear for the scheduled hearing.

In a single judge verdict Dinesh Kumar Singh held that “The petitioner was given a liberty to file written submission which was to be taken into consideration before deciding upon the application for condoning the delay of 7 days in filing the return. The petitioner filed a written submission on 03.11.2023. The impugned order has been passed without taking note of the fact that the petitioner had submitted written submission. The order shows that neither the petitioner appeared in person nor submitted the written submission. Prima facie, the said finding is incorrect on the basis of the report.” The impugned order was set aside

Assessee was represented by Anil D Nayar and Telma Raju. Revenue was represented by Cyriac Tom

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates