RAMANAICKENPETTAI PACCS,TIRUPATTUR vs. ITO, WARD-3,, VELLORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1944/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 July 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The AO denied the deduction under Section 80P because the assessee did not file its return of income within the prescribed due date under Section 139(1). The assessee contended that it is controlled by government-appointed authorities.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a primary agricultural cooperative credit society, failed to file its return of income by the due date. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 148 based on information regarding significant cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P when the return of income was not filed within the due date. The control of the society by government authorities was also a point of contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 13.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद� एवं �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� के सम� । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1944/Chn/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ramanaickenpet Primary Vs. The ITO, Agricultural Co-Operative Ward 3, Vellore. Credit Society LTD, Ramanaickenpettai, Vaniyambadi Tk, Tirupattur, Tamil Nadu-635801. [PAN: AANFR3772R] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. Shyam Sundar. S, CA ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. S. Manoj Prakash, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.07.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.03.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2019-20.

2.

At the outset, it is noted that the assessee is a primary agricultural cooperative credit society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. According to the AO, no return of income was filed within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), and based on the information received from the Insight Portal under the category 'non-filing of return' (RMS), with

2 I.T.A. No.1944/Chny/26

reference to cash deposits aggregating to ₹1,35,68,000/- in bank accounts (other than current accounts), the AO issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2023. We find that, in response to the said notice, the assessee filed its return of income on 24.08.2023 declaring total income at Nil after claiming deduction of ₹26,55,001/- under Section 80P of the Act. Thereafter, under scrutiny, after issuing statutory notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act, the AO completed the assessment vide his order dated 08.03.2024, denying deduction under Section 80P of the Act for not filing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), contending that the assessee is controlled by the authorities appointed under the Act by the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Registrar shall cause the accounts to be audited by a person authorized by him by general or special order. The said provision under Section 80 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act provides the manner of audit, the examination of various books of accounts of the societies, etc., and the submission of a report for appropriate action to rectify the defects. Further, it was contended that all the adjustment entries are made by the cooperative auditors only, and they will arrive at the actual profit or loss of the society. It was further contended, and we find, that it is a government body and the cooperative societies are entitled to get deduction under Section 80P of the Act on the entire income of the society and, on a bona fide belief, it was presumed that it was not mandatory for the society to file the income- tax return. The ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee, confirmed the order of the AO by recording his reasons from para Nos. 7.1 to 7.7 of the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is before us.

3 I.T.A. No.1944/Chny/26

3.

Ld. AR Mr. Shyam Sundar, CA, relied on the grounds of appeal.

4.

Ld. DR Mr. S. Manoj Prakash, JCIT, relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).

5.

After hearing both the parties, we note that the ld. CIT(A), in order to confirm the order of the AO in denying the deduction under Section 80P of the Act, relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in AA520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. DCIT [2022] 138 taxmann.com 571 (Mad.), wherein it was held that no deduction is admissible if no return of income was filed within the prescribed due date under Section 139(1) of the Act. On a perusal of the reasons recorded by the ld. CIT(A), we note that it was held that no return of income has been filed by the assessee under Section 139 of the Act and the assessee is not entitled to get deduction under Section 80P of the Act. There is no dispute with reference to the non-filing of the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act, and the assessee filed the return of income in response to a notice under Section 148 of the Act. Having these facts on hand, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the order of the AO in denying the deduction under Section 80P of the Act for not filing the return of income within the specified due date under Section 139(1) of the Act. Thus, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is justified, and the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

4 I.T.A. No.1944/Chny/26

Order pronounced on 13th July, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 13.07.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.

MANIS Digitally signed by MANISH H MISHRA Date: 2026.07.20 MISHRA 16:54:00 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →