PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, NIZAMABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax had condoned the delay in filing the return of income for claiming the Section 80P deduction. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was directed to consider this condonation and grant the deduction.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society, claimed a deduction under Section 80P. The Assessing Officer/CPC declined the deduction because the return of income was filed beyond the extended due date. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision.
What were the issues?
Whether the deduction under Section 80P can be allowed when the return of income was filed beyond the due date, and if the delay can be condoned by the Chief Commissioner.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON’BLE
PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee society is directed against the order passed by the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Pune (for short, “Addl/Jt. CIT(A)”), dated 16/09/2024, which in turn arises from the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer/CPC (for short, “AO”) under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), dated 03/04/2023 for
ITA 1180/HYD/2024 PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY
Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2022-23. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: “1. Your Appellant submits that the CII (A) has erred in not allowing the exemption under the principle of mutuality and confirming the order passed by the CPC 2. Your appellant submits that the CIT(A) ought to have allowed the deduction under section 80P as there is a claim in the return of income filed and also made a claim regarding allowing the exemption before the CIT (A) as a fresh claim since it was not allowed by the CPC. The addition is bad in law and may be deleted. 3. Your appellant submits the CIT (A) ought to have considered the deduction claim under 80P as fresh claim made before the appellate authority and adjudicated the case on merits. The addition is bad in law. 4. For these and such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing your appellant prays that the additions made may be deleted.”
Succinctly stated, the assessee which is a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society (PACCS), and is engaged in providing finance to Members who are farmers and facilitating sale of seeds and tools, had filed its return of income for AY 2022-23 on 31/12/2022, declaring an income of Rs. NIL after claiming deduction under section 80P of the Act of Rs.53,82,057/-. However, the AO/CPC, Bengaluru vide its intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, dated 03/04/2023 declined the assessee society’s claim for deduction under section 80P of the Act for the reason that the assessee society had filed its return of income for the subject year on 30/12/2022, i.e., beyond the extended due date of 07/11/2022.
ITA 1180/HYD/2024 PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY 3. Aggrieved, the assessee society assailed the intimation issued by the AO/CPC under section 143(1) of the Act, dated 03/04/2023 before the Addl/Jt. CIT(A) but without success.
The assessee society, aggrieved with the order of the Addl/Jt. CIT(A), has carried the matter in appeal before us.
Shri M V Anil Kumar, Advocate, Learned Authorized Representative (for short, “Ld. AR”) for the assessee society, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the assessee society had filed an application for condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, with the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad seeking condonation of the delay in filing of the return of income of income under section 139(1) of the Act, as a result whereof its claim for deduction under section 80P of the Act had been declined by the AO/CPC. Elaborating further on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad vide his order dated 29/07/2026 has accepted the application filed by the assessee society and condoned the delay in filing the return of income to claim deduction under section 80P of the Act for the subject year. The Ld. AR to buttress his contention has taken us through the order passed by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, dated 29/07/2026. The Ld. AR submitted that now when the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax has condoned the delay in filing of the return of income for the year under consideration to claim deduction under section 80P of the Act,
ITA 1180/HYD/2024 PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY therefore, the AO be directed to consider the said order of the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Hyderabad and grant deduction under section 80P of the Act.
Per contra, Shri Mohan Babu, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short, “Ld. Sr-DR”) did not object to the aforesaid request of the assessee’s counsel.
We have given thoughtful consideration and in the backdrop of the order passed by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, dated 29/07/2026, DIN & Order No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2026-27/1091569706(1) passed under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, as per which the delay involved in filing the return of income by the assessee society has been condoned to claim the deduction under section 80P of the Act, direct the AO to consider the said order and grant deduction under section 80P of the Act to the assessee society after carrying out necessary verification as per the extant law.
We thus, set aside the matter to the file of the AO to give effect to our aforesaid direction of the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad and re-decide the assessee society’s claim for deduction under section 80P of the Act.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee society is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations.
ITA 1180/HYD/2024 PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY
Order pronounced in the open court on 07th August, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA RAVISH SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad Dated:07th August, 2026. OKK/SPS Copy to: PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, 12-32, KOTAGIRI 1 VILLAGE, KOTAGIRI MANDAL, NIZAMABAD-503185, TELANGANA 2 ITO., WARD-1, O/o ITO., WARD-1,, NIZAMABAD-503185, TELANGANA 3 THE PCIT, HYDERABAD. 4 THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD BENCH 5 GUARD FILE TRUE COPY KAMALA KUMAR Digitally signed by KAMALA KUMAR ORUGANTI ORUGANTI Date: 2026.08.07 11:50:59 +05'30' ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD
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 →- Atiquiddin Shaikh vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Mr. Gurudev Singh vs. Kotak Mahindra BankMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026