Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी वी दुगा� राव �ाियक सद� एवं �ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद� के सम� Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.38/Chny/2023 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2019-20 S2754 SLM Corporation ELE and Mid Vs. The Assistant Director of School Teachers Co-op. T & C Soc. Income Tax - CPC, Ltd., No. 22, Car Street, Bengaluru. Salem 636 001, Tamil Nadu. [PAN: AARAS6200L] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 07.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 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 25.11.2022 relevant to the assessment year 2019-20.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2019-20 on 03.10.2020 admitting NIL income, after claiming deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax
2 I.T.A. No.38/Chny/23
Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The accounts of the assessee society were not audited under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act,1983 within the time allowed under section 139(1) of the Act. The audit under TN Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 was over only on 30.12.2019 as evidences by the auditor certificate which was after the due date for filing of the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the CPC, Bengaluru denied the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee has filed condonation petition under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the CBDT requesting for condonation of delay in filing the return of income and the same is pending. It was further submitted that despite having time to process the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the CPC, Bengaluru hurriedly processed the same on 11.01.2021 and denied the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the CBDT. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the application which the assessee has placed reliance on was, in fact, addressed to the ITO, Ward 1(1) dated 23.11.2021,
3 I.T.A. No.38/Chny/23
whereas, the date of order passed under section 143(1) of the Act was 11.01.2021. Thus, by then the order under section 143(1) of the Act had already been passed by the CPC, Bengaluru. Since the assessee has not corroborated its grievance with any evidence or any cogent arguments, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. By reiterating the submissions as made before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. Counsel has submitted that despite having time to process the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the CPC, Bengaluru hurriedly processed the same on 11.01.2021 and denied the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the CBDT.
On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below.
We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The case of the assessee is that despite having time to process the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the CPC, Bengaluru hurriedly processed the same on 11.01.2021 by denying the claim of deduction
4 I.T.A. No.38/Chny/23
under section 80P of the Act without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the CBDT. By filing copy of the petition for condonation of delay filed before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, the ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for suitable directions.
6.1 We have gone through the copy of the petition for condonation of delay filed before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. In view of the petition for condonation of delay filed before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh after considering the decision of the CBDT on the petition for condonation of delay filed by the assessee under section 119(2)(b) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29th March, 2023 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 29.03.2023
5 I.T.A. No.38/Chny/23
Vm/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु�/CIT, 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 6. गाड� फाईल/GF.