G-1254 SAIDAPET APCMS,TIRUVALLUR vs. ITO, NCW-10(1), CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, ADDL/JCIT (A)-7 Mumbai Chennai dated 08.10.2025 for Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. In the present appeals, the Registry has reported a delay of 64 days in filing the captioned appeals. We have examined the petition for condonation of delay along with the accompanying affidavit and

ITA No 1285/Chny/2026 (AY 2022-23) G-1254 Saidapet APCMS Vs ITO, NCW 10(1) :: 2 :: are satisfied that the reasons furnished by the assessee constitute sufficient cause for the delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case: The appellant is a cooperative society engaged in the distribution of essential commodities and provisions at affordable prices to economically weaker sections of society through its Public Distribution System (PDS) outlets as well as non-PDS stores. For Assessment Year 2022–23, the appellant filed its return of income u/s. 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 30.12.2022, claiming a deduction of Rs.94,25,351/- u/s. 80P of the Act. Upon processing the return u/s. 143(1), the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the deduction claimed u/s. 80P, thereby raising a tax demand of Rs.27,32,990/-. Aggrieved by the adjustment, the appellant filed an application u/s. 154 seeking rectification of the disallowance. However, the AO rejected the rectification application and maintained the disallowance. The AO disallowed the deduction on the ground that the return of income had been filed beyond the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. The appellant contended that the delay was neither deliberate nor attributable to any negligence on its part, but was occasioned by delays in the completion of the statutory audit, including the finalization and verification of accounts, which were beyond its control. It was further submitted that the deduction u/s. 80P is a substantive benefit available to eligible cooperative societies engaged in specified activities and ought not to be denied merely on account of a procedural delay in filing the return, particularly when the income and corresponding deduction had been duly disclosed.

ITA No 1285/Chny/2026 (AY 2022-23) G-1254 Saidapet APCMS Vs ITO, NCW 10(1) :: 3 :: 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], contending that the AO had erred in disallowing the deduction of Rs.94,25,351/- u/s. 80P solely on the ground that the return was not filed within the time prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 08.10.2025, dismissed the appeal and upheld the action of the AO, holding that the deduction was not admissible due to the delayed filing of the return. 5. Still aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal, seeking to set aside the appellate order. The assessee submits that the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the bona fide and reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return and, consequently, erred in sustaining the disallowance of the deduction claimed u/s. 80P. 6. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the orders of the lower authorities and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The undisputed facts reveal that the assessee, a co- operative society, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2022-23 u/s. 139(4) of the Act on 30.12.2022 claiming deduction u/s. 80P amounting to Rs.94,25,351/-. The said claim came to be denied while processing the return u/s. 143(1) on the ground that the return was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. The rectification application filed by the assessee u/s. 154 was also rejected. The action of the Assessing Officer was subsequently affirmed by the ld. CIT(A).

ITA No 1285/Chny/2026 (AY 2022-23) G-1254 Saidapet APCMS Vs ITO, NCW 10(1) :: 4 :: 8. Before us, the assessee submitted that the delay in filing the return was occasioned due to circumstances beyond its control, including delay in completion of statutory audit and finalization of accounts. It was further submitted that the assessee has filed the petition u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act for condonation of delay before the competent authority in terms of the provisions of the Act and the relevant CBDT Circular governing such cases. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the issue may be decided after the poucome of the competent authority after disposal of the petition u/s119(2)(b) of the Act.

The ld.AR further submitted that the claim of deduction u/s. 80P has been denied solely for the reason that the return of income was not filed within the prescribed time limit. Therefore, it was pleaded that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after the disposal of the petition filed u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act by the competent authority.

ITA No 1285/Chny/2026 (AY 2022-23) G-1254 Saidapet APCMS Vs ITO, NCW 10(1) :: 5 :: 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act has been denied solely on account of delay in filing the return of income. It is also an undisputed fact that the assessee has filed a petition under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the competent authority seeking condonation of delay.

The question as to whether the delay in filing the return deserves to be condoned falls within the jurisdiction of the competent authority empowered under section 119(2)(b) of the Act read with the relevant Circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT. The outcome of such proceedings would have a direct bearing on the assessee's eligibility to claim deduction under section 80P of the Act.

The Assessing Officer shall decide the issue in accordance with law after taking into consideration the decision of the competent authority on the condonation petition and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all necessary details and documents as may be called for by the Assessing Officer.

ITA No 1285/Chny/2026 (AY 2022-23) G-1254 Saidapet APCMS Vs ITO, NCW 10(1) :: 6 ::

Sd/- Sd/- (प�ावती एस) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (PADMAVATHY S) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद$य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER %या�यक सद$य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

चे%नई/Chennai, 'दनांक/Dated: 04th June, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS

आदेश क� ��त(ल)प अ*े)षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ&/Appellant 2. '(थ&/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु)/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय'ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड,फाईल/GF