KK 238 P N PATTY VEERAKKAL PUDU PRI CO- OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,SALEM vs. ITO WARD 1(6), SALEM

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 (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 12.11.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The appellant co-operative society filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year 2020-21 on 10/02/2021, admitting NIL income. The case of the appellant was selected for Limited Scrutiny to examine the following Issues: (a)High Creditors/Liabilities and (b) Deduction from total income under Chapter-VI-A. Not satisfied with the replies filed in response to

ITA No 600/Chny/2026 (AY 2020-21) KK 238 PNPVPPCO C S Ltd Vs ITO W 1(6) :: 2 :: various notices issued, the assessment was completed by order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 08/09/2022, thereby disallowing the deductions claimed u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(2)(b) and 80P(2)(d), amounting to Rs. 10,67,437/- Rs 5,86,478/ and Rs. 32,74,454/-and determining a taxable income of Rs. 49,27,369/-. Penalty proceedings u/s. 272A(1)(d) were initiated by issuing notices u/s. 274 r.w.s. 272A(1)(d) on several dates. The appellant did not respond to any of the said notices. The Assessing Officer, by order u/s. 272A(1)(d) dated 05/01/2023, levied a penalty of Rs.40,000/- for non- compliance of each of the notices issued u/ s. 142(1). Aggrieved, the appellant is filing this appeal." 3. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) sought condonation of delay of 38 days in filing the appeal on account of reasons that the assessee was unwell and there was a shortage in the staffs of the society. However, Ld.CIT(A), vide its order dated 12.11.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on account delay of 38 days in filing the appeal and confirmed the order of AO. 4. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Ld CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal. 5. However, The Ld AR for the assessee stated the Ld CIT(A) passed an arbitrary order without appreciating the sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal and no proper opportunity was served upon related to the issue under consideration. 6. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the order of the ld. CIT(A). We find the reasons for delay in filing appeal a

ITA No 600/Chny/2026 (AY 2020-21) KK 238 PNPVPPCO C S Ltd Vs ITO W 1(6) :: 3 :: sufficient cause hence condone the same. Further, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to substantiate the issue under consideration. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The ld. CIT(A) shall afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to diligently prosecute the appeal and actively participate in the appellate proceedings. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 19th day of May 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (इंतूरी रामा राव) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद*य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद*य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

चे�नई/Chennai, +दनांक/Dated: 19th May, 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