GURUKRUPA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,BHATKAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, KARWAR, KARWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 313/PAN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 August 2026AY 2020-215 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, noting the assessee's non-compliance at both assessment and appellate stages, decided to grant one more opportunity to substantiate its claim. The impugned order was set aside for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative society, claimed a deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. Despite receiving statutory notices, the assessee failed to comply with the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). Consequently, the deduction was disallowed.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80P when there is non-compliance with statutory notices and failure to substantiate the claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, ‘SMC’ PANAJI

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble
Hearing: 18.08.2026Pronounced: 21.08.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2020-21 is directed against the order dated 22.01.2026 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 22.09.2022 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2 Gurukrupa Credit Coop. Society Ltd.

2.

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application has been moved. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of ld. Sr.DR.

3.

We have heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 and engaged in providing credit facilities to Members. It filed return of income for A,Y. 2020-21 declaring Nil income after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act at Rs.40,11,273/-. Case selected for complete scrutiny under CASS for examination of (i) Low income (including exempt income and agricultural income) in comparison of high loans/advances/investment in shares appearing in Balance Sheet; and (ii) Deduction from Total income (Chapter VI-A) (Business ITR). Valid statutory notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) issued to the assessee but there was no compliance from the side of assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment disallowing the deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A) but again there was non-compliance to the various notices issued. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4.

We have gone through the finding of ld.CIT(A) which reads as under :

“4.4 It is a settled position of law that the deduction u/s.80P is a specific exemption provision, and therefore, the assessee must strictly demonstrate fulfilment of the statutory conditions. Mere filing of a return claiming deduction does not automatically entitle the assessee to such benefit. The failure of the appellant to comply with statutory notices, to produce any records, and to provide even basic documentary evidences indicates that the claim is unsubstantiated. In such circumstances, the Assessing Officer was fully justified in invoking section 144 and in denying the deduction claimed, based on the material available on record and in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

4.

5 In view of the above factual matrix, the judicial precedents relied upon by the Assessing Officer, and the complete non- compliance on the part of the appellant at both assessment and appellate stages, I find no reason to interfere with the findings of the Assessing Officer. The disallowance of deduction of Rs.40,11,273 u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) is upheld. Accordingly, these grounds of the appeal are Dismissed.”

5.

From the above finding, it is vivid that there was no participation from the side of assessee even in the appellate proceedings resulting in merely confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s.80P of the Act. In view thereof and without dwelling upon the merits of the case, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate it case. Ld.CIT(A) shall decide the issues

4 Gurukrupa Credit Coop. Society Ltd. raised in the instant appeal in accordance with law. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 21st day of August, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji; दिन ांक / Dated : 21st August, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Madishetty Date: 2026.08.21 13:12:45 +05'30'

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, Panaji 4. ‘SMC’ Bench / DR, ITAT, Panaji ‘SMC’ Bench ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →