MAHARAJPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,MURSHIDABAD vs. A.O. WARD-42(1), MURSHIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 476/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 March 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI SANAJY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the appeal was against an order under Section 143(1) and issues could not be remanded for verification, as such verification is done under Section 143(3). Crucially, the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued without a show-cause notice, which is a requirement of the first proviso to Section 143. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the intimation under Section 143(1) unsustainable and deleted the addition made.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Maharajapur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., filed an appeal against the Ld. CIT(A)'s order which denied a deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act for AY 2022-23. The CIT(A)'s order was passed under Section 250, stemming from an intimation issued under Section 143(1).

What were the issues?

Whether a deduction under Section 80P can be denied through an intimation under Section 143(1) without issuing a show-cause notice as required by the first proviso to Section 143.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 80P,Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 143

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI SANAJY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Sanjib Das Sharma, AR
For Respondent: Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. CIT, DR
Hearing: 26.03.2025Pronounced: 26.03.2025

Present for: Appellant by : Shri Sanjib Das Sharma, AR Respondent by : Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 26.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.03.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059625711(1) dated 11.01.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2022-23.

2.

Shri Sanjib Das Sharma, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. CIT, DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in denying in the deduction u/s. 80P as claimed by the assessee in the return of income. He urged before the Bench to reverse the action of the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

In reply, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the issue can be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for further verification.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. Obviously, the appeal is against the order passed u/s. 143(1). Consequently, the issues cannot be sent back to the Assessing Officer for verification in so far as the verification can be done in an order u/s. 143(3) of the Act only. Further, a perusal of the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) dated 03.03.2023 shows that no show cause notice has been issued to the assessee as per the requirement of the 1st proviso to section 143 of the Act. This having not been done, we are of the view that the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) is unsustainable and consequently, the addition made u/s. 143(1) of the Act is deleted.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →