MERU TOWER A CO OP HSG SOC LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 20(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 425/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 April 2026AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was filed with an inordinate delay. However, considering the reasons provided in the affidavit, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication of the delay condonation petition with a lenient approach.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Cooperative Housing Society, claimed deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest earned from cooperative banks. The CPC rejected this claim, and the assessee's rectification petition was dismissed. The subsequent appeal to the CIT(A) was filed with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, considering the circumstances explained by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(d),Section 250,Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H(SMC

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Kundalia, CA
For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe (Sr. DR)
Hearing: 21/04/2026Pronounced: 28/04/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H(SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.425/Mum/2026 (Assessment year: 2014-15)

Meru Tower A Co Op HSG vs ITO, Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai Soc. Ltd. Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400012 Plot No.549 Jameshedji Road, Matunga CR, Mumbai- Mumbai-400019 PAN:AAAAM7768C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Rashmikant Kundalia, CA Revenue by : Shri Pravin Salunkhe (Sr. DR) Date of hearing : 21/04/2026 Date of pronouncement : 28/04/2026 O R D E R Per:Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) ADDL/JCIT (A)-1, Chandigarh [for brevity the “Ld. CIT(A)”], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2014-15, date of order 28.11.2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru (for brevity the

2 ITA No.425/Mum/2026 Meru Tower A Co OP HSG Soc. Ltd. ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 154/143(1) of the Act date of order 22.07.2025. 2. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee is a Cooperative Housing Society and filed the return by declaring total income amount to Rs.12,59,550/- after claiming deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) amount to Rs.4,25,752/-. During the processing of return the CPC rejected the claim of the assessee. The assessee filed the rectification petition u/sec. 154 of the Act. But the said rectification petition was duly rejected. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay for 2794 days. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee in limine. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee is a cooperative society and earned interest from the fix deposits from investment in Cooperative Bank amount of Rs.3,39,657/- and Rs.36,095/- on Saving Account held in Cooperative Bank. The details of investment in Cooperative Bank are submitted by the assessee is as follows: “11.3 The Appellant had invested excess funds in Co-operative banks. The amount invested as at 31st March, 2014 were as follows: Name of the Bank Amount Invested Saraswat Co-Operative Bank 4,00,000 Kapol Co-Operative Bank 29,82,628 Bharat Co-Operative Bank 32,56,389 Cosmos Co-Operative Bank 30,00,000

4.

The Ld. AR further argued that during the appellate proceeding the assessee was unable to submit the proper reasons for condoning the delay of

3 ITA No.425/Mum/2026 Meru Tower A Co OP HSG Soc. Ltd. 2794 days. The Ld. AR submitted a notarized affidavit for condoning the delay which is duly executed by the secretary of the assessee- trust, Mr. Subhash Shah on 17.04.2026. The relevant paragraphs contained in the notarized affidavit is reproduced as below: “4. Nature of the Society - Relevant Consideration The Society consists of only 13 residential members and is managed by honorary office bearers, most of whom are senior citizens. The Society does not have any professional administrative set-up or compliance department. 5. Demise of Treasurer - Loss of Records In August 2020, the Treasurer Mr. V.S. Bhosale, who was exclusively handling income tax matters, passed away due to illness during the Covid period.  He was the sole custodian of:  Tax records,  Email correspondences,  Portal access,  Rectification follow-ups. Post his demise, the Society could not retrieve complete correspondence and records relating to rectification and demand follow-ups made between the years 2016 to 2020. 6. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic From March 2020 onwards, due to nationwide lockdowns, senior citizens being highly vulnerable, closure of offices, and restricted movement, the Society could not effectively pursue the matter with the Department. 7. Post-Pandemic Efforts Showing Bona Fides After normalcy resumed in 2022, 1, Mr. Subhash Shah, took charge of all pending tax matters of the Society. All pending rectifications of various years were reviewed and re-filed wherever possible. However, this being an old matter and due to non-availability of complete records handled by the deceased Treasurer, earlier correspondences could not be fully traced. 8. Compulsion to File Appeal Before CIT (A)

4 ITA No.425/Mum/2026 Meru Tower A Co OP HSG Soc. Ltd. In absence of any rectification order from either CPC or the Jurisdictional AO and with no remedy available on the portal, the Society was left with no option but to file an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A) against the 143(1)-intimation after a long delay. 9. Delay Not Intentional or Due to Negligence The delay of 2794 days was caused due to cumulative and extraordinary circumstances, namely:  Departmental inaction after transfer of rectification rights,  Procedural deadlock,  Covid-19 disruption,  Death of the Treasurer handling the matter,  Structural limitations of a small elderly-managed housing society. The delay is neither wilful nor deliberate.”

5.

The Ld. DR supported the orders of the revenue authorities and contended that the assessee had filed the appeal with an inordinate delay. It was argued that the Ld. CIT(A) had rightly rejected the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation. Accordingly, the Ld. DR prayed that the impugned appellate order be upheld.

6.

In our considered view, the assessee is a Cooperative Housing Society which had filed its return of income claiming deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest earned from investments with a Cooperative Bank. The allowability of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) is a settled issue. However, it is observed that the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a substantial delay of 2,794 days. The assessee has placed on record a notarized affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay and has sought condonation thereof. Without expressing any view on the merits of the claim, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for the limited purpose of adjudicating the assessee’s petition for condonation of delay, adopting

5 ITA No.425/Mum/2026 Meru Tower A Co OP HSG Soc. Ltd. a lenient and justice-oriented approach. The assessee is directed to place before the Ld. CIT(A) a detailed explanation for the delay, duly supported by a notarized affidavit and relevant evidences. Needless to say, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the set-aside appellate proceedings. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.425/Mum/2026 is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th day of April 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 28/04/2026 SAUMYASr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु� CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(d)

All 2,440 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →