JALGAON JILHA SAHAKARI COTTAN MARKETING FEDRATION,JALGAON vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 616/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Dr. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the difficulties faced during the Covid-19 pandemic and the extension of limitation period. For the interest of justice, the issue was restored to the file of the AO for denovo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Co-operative Society, claimed deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv). The AO denied the deduction due to non-compliance. The assessee also failed to appear before the CIT(A) despite opportunities. The AO framed the assessment order during the Covid-19 pandemic.

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv) due to non-compliance during the Covid-19 pandemic warrants a denovo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 80P(2)(a)(iv),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 441 ITR 722
    441 ITR 722 · 2022 · SC
    162 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH,

Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Year: 2018-2019 Jalgaon Jilha Sahakari ITO, Ward 1(4), Cotton Marketing Jalgaon Fedration Limited, 135/1, Vs. Jilha Peth, Near S.B.I., Jalgaon-425001 Maharashtra PAN-AADFJ8195Q अपीलेंर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: Smt. Deepa Khare Department by: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing: 24-09-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 06-10-2025 आदीश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 30.01.2025 which is arising out of Order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 10.02.2021.

2.

Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv) without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the non- compliance was reasons beyond the control of the appellant. The appellant prays that opportunity may kindly be provided to explain its case.

3.

The appellant craves leave to amend, alter, add or delete all or any of the above grounds of appeal.

3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for restoring all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) as the assessee could not make proper compliance during the appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) on account of the reasons beyond the control of the appellant.

4. Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(A).

5.

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Co- operative Society and it furnished its return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 dated 19.10.2018 declaring taxable income at Rs. 2,50,000/- after claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Act at Rs. 1,08,88,013/- However in the course of assessment proceedings carried out u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3)(A) and 143(3)(B) of the Act, Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) denied the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Act on account of non- compliance of the assessee. Further the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but again failed to appear on various opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A).

6.

We notice that the assessment proceedings have been carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic period when there were restrictions on the movement of general public and the notice issued by Ld. AO u/s 142(1) of the Act are dated 23.11.2020, 10.12.2020, 23.12.2020, 30.12.2020 and 05.01.2021. Even the assessment order has been framed on 10.02.2021. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cognizance for extension of limitation, (2022) 441 ITR 722 dated 10.01.2022 suo moto extended the limitation period falling between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 on account of the difficulties faced by the citizens of the Country on account of pandemic Covid-19. Considering the same we find that in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties the issue raised in the instant appeal deserves to the file of the Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for carrying out denovo assessment proceedings for the impugned A.Y. 2018-19 and to frame the assessment order in accordance with law after considering the details to be filed by assessee. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 06th day of October, 2025.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(iv)

All 42 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(iv) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →