RAJHAT UNION LARGED SIZED PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,HOOHGLY vs. ITO, WARD 23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1801/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 August 2026AY 2022-20233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance made by the CPC without issuing a notice violated the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the issue was restored to the file of the CPC/Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after issuing a notice.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a primary cooperative agricultural credit society, did not file its return within the due date. The CPC disallowed a deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) while processing the return under Section 143(1) without issuing a notice to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether a deduction under Section 80P can be disallowed during 143(1) processing without notice, and if the failure to file the return on time invalidates the claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 139(1),Section 143(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Sanbarta Koley, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Hearing: 29.07.2026Pronounced: 20.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1801/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23

Rajhat Union Larged Sized Vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), Hooghly Primary Co-op. Agricultural Credit Society Limited Rajhat, Bandel, Hooghly West Bengal-712123 [PAN: AABAR0849J] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sanbarta Koley, FCA Respondent by : Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 29.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.08.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 17.03.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2022-23.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, Assessee is primary cooperative agricultural credit society limited. Assessee has not filed return u/s 139(1) of the Act within due date. An intimation came to be passed u/ s 143(1) of the Act by disallowing a sum of Rs.11,13,966/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Aggrieved by the intimation dated

ITA No.1801/Kol/2026 Rajhat Union Larged Sized Primary Co-op. Agricultural Credit Society Limited; A.Y: 2022-23 15.12.2025, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dated 17.03.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 17.03.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.

3.

The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the CPC, Bengaluru has committed grave error in making disallowance without providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Ld. AR has also contended that CPC erred in law and on facts in disallowing the deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act, without appreciating that the appellant is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society duly eligible for deduction under the said provision and also failed to consider that the appellant society has been consistently allowed deduction u/s 80P of the Act in earlier assessment years, and no change in facts or law has been brought on record to justify a departure. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. DR vehemently submitted that the Assessee has not filed return on time, therefore, the CPC/Assessing Officer rightly made the disallowance claimed by the Assessee claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Thus, sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

5.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The CPC made disallowance of deduction claimed u/s

ITA No.1801/Kol/2026 Rajhat Union Larged Sized Primary Co-op. Agricultural Credit Society Limited; A.Y: 2022-23 80P(2)(d) of the Act and on the ground that Assessee has not filed return within the due date specified u/s 139(1) of the Act. However, while doing so, the CPC has not issued notice issue to the Assessee and the said disallowance made by the CPC by violating the principles of natural justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we restore the issue to the file of the CPC/ Assessing Officer with a direction to issue notice to the Assessee and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 20.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20.08.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY// (MANISH BHOI) DEPUTY REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →