THE ERODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION,ERODE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) ERODE, ERODE

PDF

ITA 3277/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 March 2025AY 2019-20Bench: the Id.CIT(A). The assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income from investments in co-operative banks was also denied by the Id/CIT(A) for the reason that the deduction was inadmissible since no specific claim had been in the return, citing the section 80A(5) of the Act. The Id. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Id. Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee's appeal concerned the denial of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) for interest income from co-operative banks and the restriction of business loss set-off by the AO in the assessment u/s 143(1). The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, denying the 80P(2)(d) claim primarily because it was not specifically made in the return, citing Section 80A(5).

Held

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) erred by not awaiting the CBDT's decision on the assessee's condonation petition u/s 119 for validating the delayed return of income. Consequently, the case was set aside and remanded back to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication on all issues after the CBDT's order on the condonation petition.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in denying the Section 80P(2)(d) deduction without awaiting the CBDT's outcome on the assessee's condonation petition for validating a delayed return of income, especially when the claim was not made in the original return.

Sections Cited

139(1), 143(1), 80P(2)(d), 80A(5), 119

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 25.02.2025Pronounced: 25.03.2025

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2019-2020) The Erode District Co-operative Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Union, Ward 1(1) No.3, Chinnamuthu First Street, Erode Edayankattuvalasu Erode 638 011. [PAN: AABAT 6036B] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. (Tirupur) ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-6, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai in Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1069871179 (1), dated 23.10.2024. The assessment was framed by the DDIT/ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru for the assessment year 2019-2020, u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’) vide order dated 05.01.2021.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had filed the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 29.11.2020 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. As per order u/s 143(1) dated 05.01.2021, total income was computed at Rs.11,80,910/-. In the return of the income the appellant had claimed the set off of current years business loss of Rs.25,21,399/- against the income from other sources, however the AO, CPC had restricted the set off to Rs.13,40,490/-. Being aggrieved the appellant has preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income from investments in co-operative banks was also denied by the ld/CIT(A) for the reason that the deduction was inadmissible since no specific claim had been in the return, citing the section 80A(5) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the ld. Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

Before us, the ld.counsel submitted that the ld.CIT(A) erred in denying the benefit of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income from investments in co-operative banks, without waiting for the outcome of the condonation petition filed u/s 119 of the Act before the competent authority/CBDT, New Delhi for the validating delayed return of income. He further, contended that the ld.CIT(A) erred in denying the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income from investments in co-operative banks on account of claim not claimed in the return of income.