Bankura District Central Co-operative Bank Limited v. Union of India & Ors.

#8. Mr. Mazumder, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the Assessing Officer has passed the order impugned and has issued reopening notice without properly applying his mind to the material on record. It is submitted that the petitioner’s case for the assessment year 2020-21 had even earlier been decided by the same incumbent in the seat of the Assessing Officer still the Assessing Officer has ignored the fact that on the previous occasion the petitioner’s contention that the petitioner was filing its income tax returns in the newly obtained PAN had been accepted and no addition on such count had been made.

#9. It is further submitted that despite the petitioner’s repeated indication in all its replies that the petitioner was ready and willing to furnish such 5 further detail as would be required, the Assessing Officer proceeded to hold against the petitioner and issue reopening notice by observing that the balance-sheet and the profit and loss accounts have not been produced, without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to produce the same.

#10. Mr. Mazumder submits that if the said documents had been called for, the petitioner would have willingly produced the same and the matter could have been resolved.

#11. Mr. Dudhoria, learned advocate appearing for the respondents/revenue authorities submits that the impugned has been rightly passed inasmuch as the petitioner has not produced the relevant documents. It is further submitted that since two PANs are active, it was incumbent on the petitioner to take steps to deactivate one of the two PANs and since the petitioner has not done so the order impugned is valid.

#12. Mr. Mazumder, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits, in reply, that even if two PANs are active, then also for such act the petitioner could at best be subjected to penalty in terms of Section 139A(7) and Section 272B of the said Act of 1961 and that the same could not be cited as a reason for initiating a reassessment proceeding. 6

#13. Heard learned advocates appearing respective parties and considered the material on record.

#14. Although it is not in dispute that the same Assessing Officer under Ward No. 31, Bankura had dealt with the petitioner’s case as recent as on March 31, 2025 while passing the assessment order in respect of assessment year 2020-21, yet, since it is noticed that the petitioner has not mentioned the aspect that the petitioner has been filing its return under the new PAN and not under the old PAN in its reply to the notice to show- cause issued under Section 148A (1) of the said Act of 1961, therefore, the Assessing Officer may not be faulted for not considering such aspect. It could well have been so that if the petitioner had indicated the same, the Assessing Officer could have considered the petitioner’s case in the light of the information provided by the petitioner to the Assessing Officer.

#15. However, since the petitioner had indicated to the Assessing Officer that the petitioner was ready and willing to provide any further detail, it was not right on the part of the Assessing Officer to pass the order under Section 148A (3) of the said Act of 1961 and issue notice under Section 148 on the ground that the petitioner did not produce 7 balance-sheet and profit and loss accounts to reconcile its claim without giving the petitioner one more opportunity to produce such balance- sheet and profit and loss accounts. Since it appears that the Assessing Officer has not given proper opportunity to the petitioner despite the petitioner’s willingness, therefore for ends of justice the petitioner should be granted one more opportunity to produce all relevant documents before the Assessing Officer including the balance- sheet and the profit and loss accounts. In such view of the matter, the order impugned dated June 25, 2025 as well as the consequential notice for the assessment year 2019-20 under Section 148 dated June 25, 2025 are set aside.

#16. The petitioner furnish all requisite documents including the balance-sheet and the profit and loss accounts to the Assessing Officer within two weeks from date. The Assessing Officer shall consider the petitioner’s reply as well as the documents furnished by the petitioner in terms of this order and shall pass a fresh order, in accordance with law. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open, to be decided by the Assessing Officer, strictly in accordance with law. 8

#17. With the above observations, WPA 22044 of 2025 stands disposed of. No costs.

#18. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on urgent basis after completion of necessary formalities. (Om Narayan Rai , J.)