IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील स.ं / ITA No.1306/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 ITO, Ward-9(3), Vs. Shri Agrasen Maharaj Nagari Pune Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit.

Office No.11, Yashwantrao Chavan Sankul, Lovavala, Maval, Pune 410 401 Maharashtra PAN : AAJCS0457K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Akshay Ram Deshmukh Revenue by : Shri Sandeep P. Sathe Date of hearing : 16.01.2025 Date of pronouncement : 21.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 10.04.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of the Assessment order dated 20.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the 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 u/s.148 of the Act. The assessee in response to notice u/s.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 AMAS4518Q. However, ld. 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.

3. Dissatisfied assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) gave succour to the assessee by holding as under :

“4. CIT(A)'s Decision:

The appellant given written submissions and grounds of appeal have been carefully perused. The assessing officer had made an addition on account of unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 1,22,40,470/-, had made an addition of Rs. Rs. 26,423/- w.r.t. interest on deposit with MSEDCL on the analogy that appellant failed to furnish any details and made an addition of Rs. 1,45,090/-w.r.t. commission/brokerage received from MSEDCL on the analogy that appellant failed to furnish any details called for.

In this regard, the appellant assessee had submitted before the assessing officer that the re-opening of the case was done against the old PAN AAJCS0457K of the appellant assessee, whereas the appellant has already filed the return of income for the same AY 2017-18 with new PAN AAMAS4875Q. The appellant had also intimated to the AO that they have obtained the new PAN in April of 2015 for want of change of 4th character being AOP and not as the company. The appellant assessee further submitted before the AO that both the PAN numbers belong to the appellant assessee and due to change of PAN from the year 2015, regular return of income for AY 2017-18 is filed with new PAN. The appellant further claims that the cash credits on which addition is made are already accounted for in the regular books of accounts, are part of income declared in the ROI filed in the regular course. The assessing officer without considering the submissions made by the appellant concluded the assessment proceedings by passing the order against the old PAN of the appellant.

In the appe