LONAWALA NAGARPARISHAD EMPLOYEES CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY,LONAWALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER. WARD 9(3), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3336/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 August 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It then restored the issue of deduction under Section 80P to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, directing the assessee to provide necessary documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Credit Cooperative Society, filed its return declaring Nil income and was selected for scrutiny. The assessee failed to comply with the Assessing Officer's requests, leading to the denial of deduction under Section 80P. This denial was upheld by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to furnish necessary documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 250,Section 144,Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S Shingte
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar
Hearing: 29.07.2026Pronounced: 31.07.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is against the order dated 30.09.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act) arising out of Assessment order dated 08.04.2021 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act.

2.

Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 395 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay. On due consideration of the said reasons, we find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the stipulated time limit. We find that the delay is not intentional and therefore placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 395 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

The sole grievance of the assessee is against the denial of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act at Rs.53,34,210/-.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before. We observe that the assessee is a Credit Cooperative Society and filed the return of income on 13.08.2018 declaring Nil income and the same was selected for Complete Scrutiny to examine the “Deduction from Total Income under Chapter VIA”. However, the assessee failed to make any compliance before the ld. Assessing Officer resulting into denial of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Further, in the appeal proceedings before ld.CIT(A), assessee failed to furnish the details about the Society registration certificate due to which the ld.CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

5.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has furnished copy of audited financial statements, copy of ITR and also stated that the assessee is a Cooperative Society regular filing the Income Tax Returns. On the other hand, ld. DR heavily relied on the order of ld.CIT(A).

6.

Considering all these facts, we deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to examine the claim made by the assessee. Needless to mention that ld. JAO in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and after considering of the documents to be filed by the ld. JAO shall decide the issue in accordance with law. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 31st day of July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated 31st July, 2026. Satish

Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.08.03 11:44:33 +05'30'

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →