The Pune Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has quashed the income tax reassessment carried on old Permanent Account Number (PAN).
The bench of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member) has observed that the communication regarding cancellation of the old PAN has also been made by the assessee which the Assessing Officer has not carried out. It is also a fact that on a new PAN the assessee is filing the regular income-tax returns. In the light of these facts, the ld.CIT(A) held that reopening of assessment proceedings is not in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
The appellant/assessee is a Cooperative Society registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The assessee is engaged in the business of accepting deposits and providing credit facilities to its members. Based on the information available in ITBA module that the assessee inter alia made Time deposit of Rs.12.00 lakh and cash deposit of Rs.1.10 crore with Lonavala Sahakari Bank Maryadit, the case was reopened by way of issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
In response to notice under section 142(1) of the act, the assessee stated that there are two PAN number. PAN Number AAMAS4518Q is in respect of Bhagwan Shree Agrasen Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha and PAN Number AAJCS0457K is in respect of Shri Agrasen Maharaj Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit on which the case is reopened. He submitted that PAN AAJCS0457K has been cancelled and intimated to the same to the department.
The assessee is filing the regular income-tax return on New PAN Number. However, AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee by holding that there is no relevance between these two PAN numbers as they pertain to different entities and Neither the name of the assessee is identical nor the PAN. Thus, the AO determined the income of the assessee at Rs.1.24 crore.
The department contended that the CIT(A) erred in giving relief to the assessee without providing an opportunity to the AO and without adjudicating the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
The tribunal held that CIT(A) gave relief to the assessee on verifying the PAN data of the assessee and information of change in the PAN is in the knowledge of the department. Further, for the A.Yrs. 2015-16 and 2018-19, the similar contentions put forth by the assessee have been accepted by the department.
The tribunal dismissed the department’s appeal and held that the order suffers no infirmity and therefore no interference is called for.
Case Details
Case Title: ITO Versus Shri Agrasen Maharaj Nagari
Case No.: ITA No.1306/PUN/2024
Date: 21.01.2025
Counsel For Appellant: Akshay Ram Deshmukh
Counsel For Respondent: Sandeep P. Sathe
