CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 19(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1164/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 April 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) and remitted the matters back to the AO. The AO is directed to consider the deduction u/s. 80P based on the outcome of the pending petition u/s. 119(2).

What were the facts?

The assessee, an employees' co-operative society, filed returns late and appealed to the CIT(A) with significant delays. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals in limine without condoning the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned and if the deduction u/s. 80P can be considered despite late filing of returns.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 139(1),Section 250,Section 119(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS. PADMAVATHY.S

Hearing: 22.04.2026Pronounced: 27.04.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: These appeals by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai (in short "FAA") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") both dated 14.02.2026 for Assessment Years (AYs) 2021-22 & 2022- 23. The common issue contended by the assessee in both the appeals pertain to the dismissal of appeal by the CIT(A) in limine and denial of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act on the ground that the assessee has not filed the return of income within the time stipulated u/s. 139(1) of the Act.

ITA Nos.1163 & 1164/Chny/2026 Central Warehousing Corporation Employees Co-operative Society Ltd., :- 2 -:

2.

The assessee is an association of persons and filed the return of income for AY 2021-22 on 01.12.2023 and for AY 2022-23 on 30.12.2022. The returns were processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide order dated 13.12.2024 for AY 2021-22 and 03.04.2023 for AY 2022-23. In the intimation u/s. 143(1) for both the AYs, the assessee was denied the deduction u/s. 80P to the tune of Rs. 31,53,370/- for AY 2021-22 and Rs.31,75,010/- for AY 2022-23. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeals before the CIT(A). There is a delay of 06 months in filing the appeal for AY 2021-22 and 26 months in filing the appeal for AY 2022-23 before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) did not condone the delay in both the appeals and dismissed the same in limine. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A) for both the AYs.

3.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee being employee cooperative society in the office bearers and employees have very limited familiarity with faceless and electronic regime of income tax proceedings. The Ld. AR further submitted that the tax consultant did not handle the assessment/appellate proceedings properly. The Ld. AR also submitted that the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act was served on the email ID which is not monitored by the assessee and hence the assessee was not aware of the issue of intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be given. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the claim by producing the required details. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) for both the appeals. The Ld. AR during the course of

ITA Nos.1163 & 1164/Chny/2026 Central Warehousing Corporation Employees Co-operative Society Ltd., :- 3 -:

hearing brought to our attention that the assessee has filed a petition u/s. 119(2) of the Act for condoning the delay in filing the return of income and the same is pending disposal. Therefore, we remit the appeals back to the AO with a direction to consider the claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act based on the outcome of the petitions filed u/s. 119(2) of the Act. Needless to say that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) each in both the appeals since considerable time and efforts have been spent by the Exchequer and for the reason that the assessee being delinquent before the lower authorities. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the A.O.

5.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 27th day of April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 27th April, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S

ITA Nos.1163 & 1164/Chny/2026 Central Warehousing Corporation Employees Co-operative Society Ltd., :- 4 -:

आदेश क� �ितिल�प 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

Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.05.05 16:58:26 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →