Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी वी दुगा� राव �ाियक सद� एवं �ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद� के सम� Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.608/Chny/2023 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Nedunchalai Nagar Co-operative Vs. The Income Tax Officer, House Building Society Limited, Ward 1(1), 177/9, Bangalow Street, Mustaj Salem. Towers, Suramangalam Main Road, Thiruvagoundanur, Salem 636 005. [PAN:AACTT0358G] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 18.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi dated 15.03.2023 relevant to the assessment year 2021-22.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the return of income for the assessment year 2021-22 on 16.03.2022 admitting Nil
2 I.T.A. No. 608/Chny/23
income after claiming deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] of ₹.2,40,11,646/-. The CPC, Bengaluru, while processing the return of income disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and passed intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 02.11.2022.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee has not filed the return of income within the due date of filing as specified under section 139(1) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act and dismissed the ground raised by the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. By filing copy of the application under section 119(2) of the Act, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation petition before the CBDT under section 119(2) of the Act dated 16.03.2022 to condone the delay in filing the return of income. Hence, the ld. Counsel prayed for setting aside the appellate order till the CBDT take a decision on the application for condonation of delay and thereafter decide the issue afresh.
On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of authorities
3 I.T.A. No. 608/Chny/23
below.
We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, since the return of income for the assessment year was not filed within the due date of filing as specified under section 139(1) of the Act, the CPC, Bengaluru disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act. We also find that before the CPC pass the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 02.11.2022, the assessee has filed condonation petition before the CBDT under section 119(2) of the Act dated 16.03.2022 to condone the delay in filing the return of income. Neither the CPC nor the ld. CIT(A) considered the condonation petition filed by the assessee under section 119(2) of the Act before the CBDT.
1 Before the Tribunal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has argued that despite having time to process the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the DCIT-CPC, Bengaluru hurriedly processed the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the CBDT. In view of the fact that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, it is opined that once the delay condonation is pending before the CBDT, the Department ought
4 I.T.A. No. 608/Chny/23
to have waited for the decision of the CBDT, for the reason that, if the CBDT condone the delay, the claim of the assessee has to be considered in accordance with law. Therefore, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to wait for the decision on the condonation petition filed by the assessee before the CBDT and thereafter pass order in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30th August, 2023 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA, G.) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 30.08.2023 Vm/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3.आयकर आयु�/CIT, 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.