AA368 APPAKUDAL PUDUPALAYAM AGRI CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,ERODE vs. DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) and directed the AO to follow up with the CBDT for an expeditious decision on the condonation petition. The deduction under Section 80P would be decided after the condonation petition's outcome.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed delayed returns of income and a condonation petition before the CBDT. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's denial of deduction under Section 80P without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in denying deduction under Section 80P without waiting for the outcome of a condonation petition for delayed return filing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
आदेश / O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President :
These two appeals by the assessee are arising out of the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [CIT(A)] in Appeal Nos.NFAC/2017-18/10033694 & CIT(A), Coimbatore-3/10113/2020-21 both dated 10.06.2022. The & 640/Chny/2022 :- 2 -: returns of income for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20 was processed by DCIT & ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru by issuing intimations u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) dated 09.08.2019 & 06.08.2020, respectively.
The only common issue in these two appeals of the assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) not considering the fundamental fact that the assessee has moved of condonation petition for filing delayed return of income before Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and without waiting the outcome of the condonation petition CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer (AO) in denying the claim of deduction made by assessee u/s. 80P of the Act, while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Act. For this, the assessee has raised identical worded grounds in both the years and the facts and circumstances are also identical. The relevant ground No.2 as raised by the assessee in for A.Y 2018-19 reads as under:
“2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the fundamental fact the Assessing Officer, while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1), denied the claim of deduction made by the appellant u/s. 80P of the IT Act, without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the CBDT.”
& 640/Chny/2022 :- 3 -:
We have heard Ld. CIT-DR and Sr. D.R. Despite issuance of notice, assessee moved adjournment petition but going through the file, it is noticed that without the presence of the assessee the matter can be decided. Hence, we took up the matter and decided to adjudicate the same.
At the outset, the Ld. CIT-DR as well as Ld. Sr. D.R has not raised the objection as regards to restoring the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) and to await the decision of CBDT in regard to assessee’s condonation petition for condonation of late filing of return of income and consequently deciding the deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. In term of the above, we restore these two appeals of assessee back to the file of the CIT(A). We also direct the concerned A.O to take up the matter with the CBDT for expediency disposal of the relevant condonation petition filed before CBDT by the assessee for condonation of late filing of returns of income for the relevant A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20. In term of the above, the orders of the lower authorities in both the A.Ys are set aside and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. & 640/Chny/2022 :- 4 -:
In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th January, 2023.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026