RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 705/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 August 2026AY 2024-258 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) by giving a liberal interpretation to the provisions for condonation of delay. The appeals were remanded back to the CIT(A) to decide on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative society, filed its return after the due date. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals due to delays in filing, refusing to condone the same. The assessee's counsel faced personal difficulties, and the society was run by retired employees not conversant with tax laws.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) was sufficiently caused and should be condoned. Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P solely on the ground of delayed filing of return is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos: 704 & 705/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2023-24 & 2024-25

RMS Karamchari Sakh ITO and Bachat Sahakari Ward 1(4) Vs Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur (Respondent) Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur RS HRO RS Branch, Jaipur PAN: AACAR 7371J (Appellant)

Assessee Represented: None/Adj. rejected. Revenue Represented: Mrs. Arti Rawat, JCIT Date of hearing : 12-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 25-08-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

Aforesaid interconnected appeals have been filed by the Appellant – RMS Karamchari Sakha and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur ( hereinafter referred to as the “assessee”), sought to set aside the impugned orders both dated 30.01.2026 passed by the Additional/Joint commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Mumbai

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 2 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

[hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] qua the assessment order for Assessment year 2023-24 & 2024-25 on the grounds inter-alia that:- ITA No.704/JPR/2026 (A.Y.2023-24)

“1. The impugned addition made in the intimation order u/s 143(1) dated 02.02.2024 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be deleted.

2.

The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal by refusing to condone the delay, despite a duly filed application for condonation, and without affording adequate opportunity of being heard or adjudicating the issues on merits. The impugned order, having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, deserves to be quashed, or alternatively, the matter be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after condoning the delay.

3.

Rs.15,03,680/-: The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of deduction made by the AO of Rs.15,03,680/- u/s 80P solely on the ground of delayed filing of return u/s 139(1) despite the fact that the assessee is a Co-operative Society engaged in the activity of accepting deposits from its members only and redeploying the funds by way of advancing loans to the members and investing surplus funds. The disallowance so made and confirmed, is being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts kindly be deleted in full.

4.

The appellant prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.

ITA No.705/JPR/2026 (A.Y.2024-25)

“1. The impugned addition made in the intimation order u/s 143(1) dated 28.02.2025 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be deleted.

2.

The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal by refusing to condone the delay, despite a duly filed application for condonation, and without affording adequate opportunity of being heard or adjudicating the issues on merits. The impugned order, having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, deserves to be quashed, or alternatively, the

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 3 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

matter be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after condoning the delay.”

3.

Rs.10,97,530/-: The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of deduction made by the AO of Rs.10,97,530/- u/s 80P solely on the ground of delayed filing of return u/s 139(1) despite the fact that the assessee is a Co-operative Society engaged in the activity of accepting deposits from its members only and redeploying the funds by way of advancing loans to the members and investing surplus funds. The disallowance so made and confirmed, is being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts kindly be deleted in full.

4.

The appellant prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.”

2.

Briefly stated, facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are: the assessee is Cooperative Society registered under Rajasthan State Cooperative Societies Act, 1953 with the principal object of promoting the welfare and socio-economic upliftment of railway employees and their families being managed by retired employees of Indian Railway. The assessee society filed its return declaring gross total income of Rs. 15,03,683/- and after claiming deduction of the same u/s 80P shown its income as Nil. However Assessing Officer while processing return made disallowance thereof on the ground that assessee society has filed return after due date prescribed u/s 139(1).

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 4 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

3.

Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeals who has dismissed the same in limine by not condoning the delay of 452 days for filing the appeal for A.Y. 2023-24 and delay 59 days in filing the appeal for A.Y. 2024-25 before the Ld. CIT(A). Feeling aggrieved with the impugned orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A), assessee society has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeals. 4. We have heard Ld. ARs for the assessee and Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the record available on file. 5. So far as question of not condoning the delay of 452 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) is concerned, we have perused in para 4.2 at page 4 and 5 of the impugned order, wherein application for condonation of delay filed by the assessee society is extracted. It is categorically pleaded in the application for condonation of delay that counsel engaged by the assessee society namely Shri Narendra Goswami could not render his services due to the terminal illness of his father who was suffering from cancer of the large intenstine and who has unfortunately passed away on 11.11.2024. Narender Goswani being primary caregivers could not handle legal matters in time. Since, the assessee society is being run by retired employees of India Railway who are engaged in promoting welfare and socio-economic upliftment

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 5 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

of railway employees and their families could not the appeal by engaging any other counsel as the entire record was with Narendra Goswami. We are of the considered view that when the entire delay in filing the appeal is arbitrated to the counsel who was hired by paying fee and he was unable to render services due to terminal illness of his father, by giving liberal interpretation to the provisions for condonation of delay, we find “sufficient cause” to condone the delay in filing the appeal which will provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee society to get their appeal decide on merits once for all. This will also stop the multiplicity of the proceedings. 6. So far as the delay of 59 days in filing the appeal for A.Y. 2024- 25 by the assessee society is concerned, the assessee has come up with application for condonation of delay therein that the delay is due to bonafide misunderstanding of the assessee society that they would receive formal demand notice from the department and thought that the appeal was not to be filed on the basis of intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act but on receipt of formal demand notice. 7. We are of the considered view that since the assessee society is being run by retired employees of Indian Railway for welfare of their families and they were not conversant the intricacies of the income tax law, we find it a “sufficient cause” to condone the delay of 59 days by

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 6 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

giving liberal interpretation to the provisions for condonation of delay. Moreover to stop multiplicity of the proceedings and to provide reasonable opportunity of being heard on merits the delay of 59 days is condoned and appeals are being heard on merit. 8. Bare perusal of the impugned orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee society go to prove Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without touching the merits of the case merely on the ground that delay which have not been condoned. Now the delay has been condoned by the Bench by remanding the appeals back to Ld. CIT(A) to decide on merits after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee society. 9. Resultantly, the appeals filed by the assessee society are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 25/08/2026. *Santosh. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant-

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 7 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

2.

The Respondent- 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. Guard File By order,

Asst. Registrar

I.T.A No. 704 and 705/JPR/2026 Page No 8 RMS Karamchari Sakh and Bachat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Jaipur

1.

Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 14.08.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the 14.08.2026 Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S. /P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement ; 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S. /P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk along with Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. Date on which the file goes for Xerox 12. Date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. Date on which the file goes to the superintendent for checking 14 The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the tribunal order 15 Date on which the file goes to dispatch section 16 Date of Dispatch of the Order

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 →