R 1634 MURUNGAI PACCS LTD.,TRICHY vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2021/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 June 2026AY 2021-225 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the denial of deduction under Section 80P was justified as the return of income was not filed within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1), relying on the provisions of Section 80AC. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative society, filed its return of income for AY 2021-22 claiming deduction under Section 80P. The return was filed after the due date prescribed under Section 139(1), leading to the denial of the deduction by the CPC and confirmation by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the deduction under Section 80P is allowable when the return of income is filed beyond the due date, considering the provisions of Section 80AC.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI BENCHES, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE INTURI RAMA RAO & HON’BLE SS VISWANETHRA RAVI

Pronounced: 24.06.2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, चे�नई पीठ�, चे�नई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI BENCHES, CHENNAI BENCH: A BEFORE HON’BLE INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2021/CHNY/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assmt. Year: 2021-22) R 1634 MURUNGAI PACCS LTD. Income Tax Officer, 1, MURUNGAI POST,MURUNGAI CPC, Bangalore B.O.,, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI-621207, Vs. TAMIL NADU (अपीलाथ� Appellant) (��थ� Respondent) Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AABAR2404D िनधा�रती �ारा/Assessee represented by: Mr.T.Vasudevan, Advocate राज� व �ारा/Revenue represented by: Mr.S.Manoj Prakash, JCIT

सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 16.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 24.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of ld.Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], dated 21.02.2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2021-22.

2.

The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissing the appeal is contrary to law, erroneous and unsustainable on the facts of the case.

2.

The CIT(A) NFAC erred in upholding the order of the department on jurisdiction and merits of the case.

3.

The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, erred in law and on facts in denying the appellant's claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without appreciating that the appellant had a valid and substantive statutory entitlement to such deduction.

4.

The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, failed to appreciate that the delay in filing the return of income was due to the belated completion of the statutory audit under the Co-operative Societies Act and delayed receipt of the audited financial statements on 07.10.2023, which was beyond the control of the appellant. Consequently, the appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause from filing the return within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act, leaving no option but to file the return under Section 139(8A) as an updated return.

5.

The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, failed to consider that the delay in completion of the statutory audit was further aggravated by the disruptions caused due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which significantly impacted the functioning of co-operative societies and their auditors, thereby constituting a reasonable cause for the delay.

6.

The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, erred in not considering and adjudicating upon the judicial precedents relied upon by the appellant, which support the allowability of deduction under Section 80P even in cases of delayed filing of return where such delay is attributable to genuine and reasonable cause, thereby resulting in denial of legitimate relief credit facilities to members, without any profit motive. The delay in filing the return was neither willful nor intentional but only due to circumstances beyond the control of the appellant.

8.

The CIT(A) NFAC, in any event, ought to have seen that the requirements as per the provisions of the Act are not satisfied and hence the assessment is bad in law and thus allowed the appeal..”

3.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Appellant is a Co-operative Society incorporated under the provisions of The Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. It is engaged in the business of sale of fertilizers, public distribution system of commodities and providing crop insurance facilities and providing credit facilities to its members. The Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2021-22 was filed u/s.139(1) of the Income Tax Act on 19.03.2025 disclosing NIL income after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act of Rs.4,17,096/-. The said Return of Income was processed by CPC u/s.143(1) vide intimation dated 13.12.2024 denying claim for deduction u/s.80P of Rs.4,17,100/- for the reason that the Return of Income was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act placing reliance on the provisions of section 80AC of the Income Tax Act.

4.

Being aggrieved by the said intimation, an appeal was filed before the ld.CIT(A), who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer placing reliance on the decision of several judicial precedents of this Tribunal.

5.

Being aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal.

6.

We heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Assessing Officer had denied deduction u/s.80P solely on the ground that the Return of Income was not filed within the due date u/s.139(1) of the Act. Even, on appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by passing a very reasoned order placing reliance on the provision of section 80AC of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the order of ld.CIT(A) since the order of the ld.CIT(A)

in consonance with the plain provision of the Act, thus, we do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the assessee. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24th June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 24th June, 2026 SGR, Sr.PS आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem. 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “ए” ब�च, चे�नई / DR, ITAT Chennai. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. GANGADHARA Digitally signed by GANGADHARA RAO SALEELA RAO SALEELA Date: 2026.07.01 17:24:37 +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 →