THE SURAMANGALAM CO-OP. HOUSE BUILING SOCIETY LTD.,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), SALEM

(अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr..S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) by virtual प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Dr.I.Roopa, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : The below mentioned appeals have been filed by the appellant assessee for AY-2018-19 and AY-2019-20 contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority indicated Column-E, herein below:- S. Appeal AYs Appellant CIT(A) Order Details Respondent No. Nos. A B C D E F The Suramangalam DIN & Order No. ITBA / ITA Cooperative House NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / No. Building Society 1070292490(1) dated 1 2018-19 2996 / Chny Limited 12.11.2024 Income Tax / 2024 No.13, Bharathiyar Officer, Street, DIN & Order No. ITBA / Ward-1(1), H.O, NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / Salem 2997 / Chny Salem. 1070337589(1) dated 2 / 2024 2019-20 [PAN: 13.11.2024 AABAT0705B]

Page - 1 - of 3 2.0 The twin appeals are centering around a common issue and hence for the purposes of convenience, adjudicated together. For the purposes of this adjudication the facts and figures for AY-2018-19 have been taken. The decision for AY-2018-19 shall apply mutatis mutandis for appeal AY-2019-20. 3.0 In for AY-2018-19, appellant assessee has contested that the action of the Ld. AO in not allowing it deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, admittedly, it had filed belated return as result of which deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act was disallowed and affirmed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in compliance to latest CBDT instruction empowering CCIT to condone the delay in specified cases, it has petitioned condonation of delay and the same was pending. It was urged that in the event of its application getting accepted, it will become entitled for 80P deduction. The Ld. DR relied upon the orders of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The only issue in the case is the denial of deduction u/s 80P on account of belated return filed by the assessee. In consideration of latest CBDT instruction, the assessee has petitioned condonation of delay before the competent authority. We therefore in the interest of Page - 2 - of 3 justice, set aside the order of lower authorities and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to await decision of the competent authority qua assessee’s petition for condonation of delay and decide accordingly. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5.0 In the result the assessee’s appeal for is allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 The decision taken herein above shall apply in assessee’s appeal vide for AY-2019-20, mutatis mutandis. Order pronounced on 4th , April-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (ABY T VARKEY) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्याययक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, यदनांक/Dated: 4th , April-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रयतयलयप अग्रेयषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Assessee: 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Revenue 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Salem 4. यवभागीय प्रयतयनयि/DR 5. गार्ड फाईल/GF

Page - 3 - of 3