Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a co-operative society, claimed deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The CPC disallowed the claim stating the return was filed beyond the due date. The Addl. CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed a condonation petition before the CBDT for the delay in filing the return, which was pending. The Addl. CIT(A) had not considered this fact. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Addl. CIT(A) to decide after the CBDT's decision.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P was justified when a condonation petition for delay in filing return was pending before the CBDT?
Sections Cited
80P, 143(1), 139(1), 80AC, 119(2)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar [hereinafter “Addl. CIT(A)”] dated 08.11.2024 in the matter of intimation issued u/s.143 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) issued by Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru (hereinafter “CPC”) dated 02.11.2022.
The only effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against the order of Ld. Addl. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 31,74,266/- claimed u/s. 80P of the Act.
1. 3. The assessee is a co-operative society and filed its return of income on 25.03.2022, declaring a total income at Nil. The assessee in the return of income has claimed deduction u/s. 80P of the Act of Rs.31,74,270/-. However, the CPC, Bengaluru through intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act, disallowed the claim on the ground that the return was filed beyond the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl. CIT(A).
The Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance on the basis that the return was not filed within the due date and, therefore, as per Section 80AC of the Act, the deduction u/s. 80P of the Act was not allowable.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay in filing return of income u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act, which is currently pending before CBDT. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has decided the appeal without considering the pendency of this condonation petition. Accordingly, the Ld. AR requested that the order of Ld. Addl. CIT(A) be set aside and the matter be restored with a direction to await the decision of the CBDT.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowances of the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act on the ground that the return was not filed within the due date prescribed, and therefore, in light of Section 80AC of the Act, the deduction was not allowable. However, the assessee has submitted that a condonation petition u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act has been filed and is pending before CBDT. The Ld. Addl. CIT(A) did not take note of this fact into account while deciding the appeal. The assessee has submitted that the delay in filing the return was attributed to the fact that the appointed auditor had not completed the audit by the due date. Since, the assessee has filled a condonation petition, which is still pending, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration. In view of above, we remand the matter back to the file of Ld. Addl. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal after the decision of the CBDT. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 15th April, 2025.