NAHUR VISHWAKUTIR CHS LTD,MULUND WEST vs. ITO 26(1)(1), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“J(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6305/MUM/2026 (AY: 2021-20) (Physical hearing) Nahur Vishwakutir CHS Ltd. ITO, Ward – 26(1)(1), Mumbai Nahur Village, Mulund Goregaon vs Kautilya Bhawan, Bandra Kurla Link Road, Mulund (West), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400080. Mumbai – 400051. [PAN: AAAAN2444A] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Gautam Gokhale, CA Revenue by Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. DR Date of hearing 18.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 20.08.2026 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)dated 01.08.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Id. CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act, in regards to the interest income of Rs. 5,34,735/- received by the assessee (a Co-operative Housing society) from its fixed deposit kept with cooperative bank (NKGSB Cooperative Bank Ltd.), while making prima facie adjustment u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the CPC. 2. The Id. CIT(A) erred in upholding disallowance of the claim u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the CPC has rejected such claim u/s 143 (1) of the Act without issuing mandatory show cause notice nor assigning any reasons, therefore the action of the CPC is bad in law and the deduction ought to be allowed. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of the deduction claimed by the Appellant under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, in respect of interest income of Rs. 12,765/- and Rs. 5,21,970/- earned on FDs and Savings account with NKGSB Cooperative Bank Ltd, on the alleged ground that the said bank is not an Cooperative society, therefore wrongly

ITA No.6305/Mum/2026 (AY: 2021-22) Nahur Vishwakutir CHS Ltd. concluding that the assessee was not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. The Assessee craves leave to add, alter modify or delete one or more ground before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and the record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there was a delay in filing the first appeal before the learned CIT(A). There was a delay of 768 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A). The delay was neither intentional nor deliberate. In fact, the order of the AO was not received by the assessee, as the same was delivered in the spam folder of the email. The assessee, on realizing such fact, filed the appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), instead of considering the explanation of the assessee in sympathetic way, dismissed the appeal for the technical reason that the delay is not explained. The learned AR of the assessee submits that there was no intentional or deliberate delay, but due to the fact that neither a physical copy of the assessment order nor the same through email was received by the assessee. The assessee has a good case on merit and has reasons to seek one more opportunity to contest the case on merit. On merit, the learned AR of the assessee submits that the only issue raised by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) relates to deduction under section 80P(2)(d), which is otherwise covered in favour of the assessee. 3. On the other hand, the learned CIT(A) for the Revenue submits that the assessee has not properly explained the delay. In case this Bench is of the view that the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) deserves

ITA No.6305/Mum/2026 (AY: 2021-22) Nahur Vishwakutir CHS Ltd. to be condoned, the matter may be restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication, as there is no finding of the learned CIT(A) on merits. 4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties. Considering the explanation offered by the assessee that the order of the AO/CPC was not received by the assessee, rather, it was delivered in the spam folder, which remained unnoticed. We find that, in support of such contention, the assessee has filed an affidavit of Gautam Nayak, Secretary of the assessee-society. Thus, considering the principle of law on limitation that when technical considerations and the cause of substantial justice are kept against each other, the cause of substantial justice may be preferred, we are of the view that the aforesaid delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. Therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is condoned. Now, adverting to the merits of the case. 5. We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated various grounds of appeal on merit. Considering the fact that we have condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A), therefore, matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits. Needless to direct that, before deciding the appeal on merits, the learned CIT(A) shall allow a fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future in making compliance to track the e-mail communication. The assessee is also allowed to file all the factual and legal submissions in

ITA No.6305/Mum/2026 (AY: 2021-22) Nahur Vishwakutir CHS Ltd. support of their claim before ld CIT(A). in the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order was pronounced in open court on 20/08/2026 Sd/- Sd/- JAGADISH PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

MUMBAI, Dated: 20/08/2026 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai