KHAR TRAILOKYA PREMISES CO-OPRATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 22(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 286/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 April 2026AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution as the assessee failed to appear and present its case. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recalling of the order by substantiating reasons for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80P for AY 2018-19. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, finding that the return was not filed within the due date as per Section 139(1). The assessee did not appear before the ITAT.

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. Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.286/MUM/2026 (AY: 2018-19) Khar Trailokya Premises Co- vs. ITO Ward 22(2)(1) Oprative Society Ltd. Piramal Chamber Lalbaug Mumbai- Ground Floor Khar Trailokya 400012. Premises Co-oprative Society Limited 16th Road Khar West Mumbai-400052. PAN/GIR No: AABAK96521 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Himanshu Joshi (SR DR) Date of Hearing 02.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 01.07.2026

O R D E R PER BIJYANANDA PRUSETH, AM:

This appeal filed by the revenue emanates from the order passed under

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘Act’) by the Commissioner of

Income Tax, Appeal-ADDL/JCIT (A), Raipur [in short, ‘CIT(A)’], dated 02.01.2026

for the assessment year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:

" 1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer/CPC/Lower Authorities have erred in not allowing the deduction u/s 80P amounting to Rs. 3,57,773/- and sustaining the action of AO without considering the facts of the case and written submissions made, which is against the natural justice and is wholly wrong and is against the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder. The appellant submits that the same deduction u/s 80P had been allowed by the FAA in other

ITA No.286/MUM/2026 Khar Trailokya Premises Co-Oprative Society Ltd.

assessment year of the appellant itself. The appellant therefore prays that the said deduction be allowed.

2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer/CPC/Lower Authorities have erred in considering the due date for filing I.T. return as 31/07/20218 instead of 31/10/2018, as extended, and no filing of any forms of 10B/10BB were applicable, and wrongly applying section 80IC, which was wholly wrong and is against the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder.

3) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify and delete all or any of the aforesaid grounds of appeals on or before the date of hearing.”

3.

The case was posted for hearing on 02.04.2026. None appeared on behalf of

the appellant nor any request for adjournment nor any written submission was filed.

The Ld. Sr. DR attended on behalf of the revenue and supported the orders of lower

authorities. No useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings

before us. The case is, accordingly, decided on the basis of materials on record.

4.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income for

the AY 2018-19 on 31.10.2018, wherein deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act was not

allowed. The assessee filed rectification u/s 154 of the Act, which was also rejected.

During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed written submission which has

been considered by the CIT(A). It was found that the assessee did not file return of

income within the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. Hence, the conditions for claiming

deduction u/s 80P(2) under Part-C of Chapter-VIA of the Act were not satisfied.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

ITA No.286/MUM/2026 Khar Trailokya Premises Co-Oprative Society Ltd.

5.

Aggrieved by the order CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. As stated earlier, the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal on the date of hearing. It has also not requested for adjournment nor filed any written submission along with relevant details/evidences. It is thus clear that the appellant has no specific submissions in support of the grounds raised in the appeal. It is well settled that the Tribunal has the inherent power to dismiss the appeal if the appellant/revenue does not represent its case despite opportunity granted to him. Therefore, without delving further, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However, liberty is granted to the assessee to seek recalling of this order by substantiating the reasons for non-appearance/compliance/prosecution. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order is pronounced on 01.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (BIJYANANDA PRUSETH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

*Aniket Chand; Sr. PS MUMBAI Date: 01.07.2026 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The PCIT/CIT 4. DR/AR, ITAT, MUMBAI 5. Guard File By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, MUMBAI

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →