MORATTUPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,TIRUPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2) TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 62/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 March 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay, especially considering the assessee's status as a co-operative society and the reasons provided. The Tribunal also found that the CIT(A) should have awaited the outcome of a condonation petition filed before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society, filed a belated appeal before the CIT(A) against an intimation under Section 143(1). The CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 223 days and dismissed the appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and whether the CIT(A) should have awaited the outcome of a separate condonation petition filed before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 119(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 18.03.2025Pronounced: 25.03.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member): The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ADDL/JCIT(A)-2 Hydrabad [CIT(A)] dated 06.11.2024 for Assessment Year 2020-21.

2.

The appellant is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society, has filed belated appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against the order/intimation u/s 143(1) dated 29.12.2023 passed by the AO, CPC, Bengaluru. However, the ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 223 days in filing the appeal and opined that deciding the appeal on merits doesn’t arise. In effect, he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Hence, assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

The ld. AR of the assessee submitted various arguments inter- alia that the appellant has filed a condonation petition u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore, seeking condonation of the delay in filing the return of income.

4.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and pleaded for the dismissal of appeal of the assessee.

5.

We have heard the both parties and perused the records of the appeal papers. Having gone through the reasons, we find that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have been condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Keeping in mind the assessee is a primary agricultural co-operative credit society and reasons stated in the order of the ld.CIT(A) at para 2, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Further, we are of the considered view that the ld.CIT(A) should have waited for the outcome of the condonation petition filed before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore for the validating delayed return of income. Hence, we set aside and remand back the appeal to the file of the ld.CIT(A) to wait for the outcome of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore on the condonation petition for validating delayed return filed. After receipt of the order of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore on the aforesaid petition, the ld.CIT(A)will take his judicial view on all issues/fresh issues according to law.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th March, 2025 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 119(2)(b)

All 980 judgments and leading authorities on Section 119(2)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →