TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1843
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... legally permitted to accept SBNs from its members during demonetization period without appreciating that the said addition was not justified in law and on facts. 2] The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that assuming without admitting that the assessee credit society was not permitted by Govt. to accept old SBNs from its members, still it is to be noted that no addition u/s 69A could have been made in the hands of the assessee society once it was established that the said cash deposits were made out of income belonging to the members and it did not represent any income of the assessee society and therefore, the said addition was not justified in law and on facts. 3] Without prejudice to the above ground, it is submitted that as per the provisions of section 5 of Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liability) Act, 2017 and other provisions, the restriction placed on acceptance or transfer of SBNs was from 31.12.2016 and hence, even on this count, there was no violation on the part of the assessee society under the said law in accepting deposits from its members prior to 31.12.2016 and therefore, the reason stated by the lower authorities for making the above....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ving effect to CIT(A) order. With the intention to obtain the said Computation Sheet of revised demand from the A.O., the assessee raised multiple grievances with the A.O. online from time to time, viz. 20.03.2024, 21.06.2024, 27.08.2024 and the C.A. was also following up with the Jurisdictional A.O. from time to time. The Computation Sheet for revised demand was finally issued by the A.O. physically on 06.03.2025. After receipt of the Computation Sheet for revised demand as per Order giving Effect to CIT(A) Order, the Manager of the assessee society made enquiries regarding Counsels practicing before Hon'ble ITAT Pune to file appeal against the CIT(A) Order. Since there are not many Counsels in Nashik who practice before Hon'ble ITAT Pune, locating and identification of Counsel took some time. 3. It is submitted that thereafter, the relevant documents and information were forwarded to the Counsel. The appeal came to be drafted and filed within a short period thereafter, on 27.05.2025 i.e. within a period of two months from the end of the month in which the Computation Sheet revising the demand as per Order giving Effect to CIT(A) Order was received by the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he rejection of a meritorious claim on the technical ground of the bar of limitation, the Courts lean towards consideration on merits by adopting a liberal approach towards 'sufficient cause' to condone the delay. The Court considering an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act may also look into the prima facie merits of an appeal. A liberal approach may be adopted when some plausible cause for delay is shown. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condoned delay of 1537 days sub-serving the cause of justice. It was held so while observing that the appeal filed by the appellant with a delay was unintentional, much less due to any deliberate laches, and was well-explained by the State before the High Court. Hon'ble Court further held that in cases where the merits are significant, a more liberal approach may be adopted to allow for the examination of the case on its merits. Having gone through the averments made in the condonation application and considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Court in the case of Inder Singh (supra), I am of the view that due to 'reasonable cause' assessee fai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anstha Maryadit Vs. ITO - ITA Nos.2432 and 2433/PUN/2024 order dated 06.01.2025 by submitting that section 80AC has been amended from A.Y.2018-19 and prior to the said amendment, section 80A(5) can be invoked only if the assessee files the return but fails to make a claim. In a situation where assessee has not filed the return or had made a claim in the return filed in response to notice issued by Assessing Officer, then such deduction cannot be denied if all the other parameters of getting deduction u/s. 80P of the Act are complied with. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Chirakkal Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors Vs. CIT - ITA Nos. 212 and others dated 15.02.2016 where it has been held that even the assessee can make a claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act in the return filed in compliance to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. 9. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 10. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. The issue for my consideration is regarding addition for unexplained money of Rs. 4,07,500/- sustained by ld.CIT(A). I ....