POONAM CHAMBERS B WING COMMERCIAL PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

ITA 7043/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 October 2026AY 2019-2013 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Poonam Chambers B Wing Commercial Premises Co Operative Society Ltd, filed appeals against two separate orders dated 18/03/2026 passed by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Kochi, under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. These orders pertained to Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2021-22. The appeals were heard together as the assessee was common and the primary issue involved was the deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. For A.Y. 2019-20, the assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 91,26,052, which was disallowed by the CPC, Bengaluru, and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee's return for A.Y. 2019-20 was filed on 20/09/2019, after the extended due date of 31/08/2019, due to internal disputes within the managing committee.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the action of CPC Bengaluru in making disallowance under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act for A.Y. 2019-20 was incorrect. The Tribunal noted that the power to disallow deductions claimed under Chapter VIA, specifically under the heading 'C - Deductions in respect of certain incomes', was introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, and was applicable for assessment years commencing on or after April 1, 2021. Therefore, CPC Bengaluru did not possess the authority to make such a disallowance for A.Y. 2019-20. The Tribunal relied on the decision in the case of Vishva Villa Co op Housing Society Ltd. for this proposition. Consequently, the disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) by the CPC was set aside. The appeals were allowed on this ground, and the matter was not remanded as the primary issue of the CPC's power was decided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of CPC Bengaluru in disallowing the deduction claimed by the appellant under Section 80P(2)(d) amounting to Rs. 91,26,052 for A.Y. 2019-20, and whether such action was invalid in law? (Section 80P(2)(d)) 2. Whether the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, considering that CPC Bengaluru allegedly lacked the power to disallow deductions claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) prior to the Finance Act, 2021? (Section 143(1)(a)) 3. Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) by the CPC was justified, given the assessee's alleged non-compliance with Section 80AC, and whether the CPC had the power to make such disallowance for A.Y. 2019-20? (Section 80P(2)(d), Section 80AC) Assessee's Contentions: - The action of the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) in disallowing the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was incorrect and bad in law. - CPC Bengaluru had no power to disallow deductions claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) prior to the Finance Act, 2021, which was applicable for subsequent years. - Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Vishva Villa Co op Housing Society Ltd. - The delay in filing the return was due to circumstances beyond the appellant's control, specifically disputes within its managing committee. Revenue's Contentions: - Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(d),Section 250,Section 143(1)(a),Section 80AC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 7043/MUM/2026
ITA 7044/MUM/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई पीठें, म ुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: C BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 7043/MUM/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2019-20) POONAM CHAMBERS B WING DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL PREMISES CO INCOME TAX OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD DCIT CIRCLE 22-1, PIRAMAL MUMBAI-400012, MUMBAI-400018, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAAAP1685M

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, AR प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Ajay Soneji SR-Dr

ITA 7044/MUM/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-2022) POONAM CHAMBERS B WING DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL PREMISES CO INCOME TAX OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD DCIT CIRCLE 22-1, PIRAMAL MUMBAI-400012, MUMBAI-400018, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

PAN of Assessee: AAAAP1685M

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, AR प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Ajay Soneji SR-Dr

सुन

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(d)

All 2,431 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →