THE EZHUMZTTOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,PATHANMTHITTA vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA
Facts
The appellant, a co-operative society, claimed deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) for AY 2020-21, which the AO denied for interest income, assessing total income at Rs. 57,08,630/-. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, granting Section 80P(2)(d) deduction for interest from co-operative banks but confirming disallowance for scheduled bank interest. The appellant filed an appeal with the ITAT with a delay of 511 days.
Held
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, rejecting the condonation of delay petition. It found the appellant's explanation for the 511-day delay unsubstantiated and not bona fide, lacking crucial details about the pending rectification appeal cited by the appellant.
Key Issues
Whether the appellant's petition for condonation of the 511-day delay in filing the appeal had sufficient and bona fide grounds.
Sections Cited
80P, 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(2)(d), 143(3), 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA No. 778/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ezhumattoor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant 7-392, Ezhumattoor P.O., Malappally Pathanamthitta 689586 [PAN: AAFAT6575K] vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Thiruvalla .......... Respondent Assessee by: Smt. Pooja V.M., Advocate Revenue by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 27.03.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a co-operative society registered under the Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. It is engaged in the business of accepting deposits from members and providing credit facilities to members. The return of income for AY 2020-21 was filed on 30.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs. 25,120/- after claiming deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of
2 ITA No. 778/Coch/2025 Ezhumattoor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. income, the assessment was completed by the Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department (hereinafter called "the AO") vide order dated 27.09.2022 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act at total income of Rs. 57,08,630/-. While doing so, the AO denied deduction u/s. 80P in respect of interest income of Rs. 56,83,510/- placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Totgar’s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO [2010] 322 ITR 283 (SC).
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order partly allowed the appeal by directing the AO to allow deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received from co-operative banks. However, confirmed the disallowance of claim for deduction in respect of interest income received from scheduled banks. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed by the CIT(A).
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal.
At the outset, I find that there was delay in filing the appeal by 511 days. The appellant filed a petition seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the delay had occurred on account of pending rectification appeal and there strong case on merits in favour of the appellant society. I have carefully perused the averments made in the petition seeking condonation of delay. The
3 ITA No. 778/Coch/2025 Ezhumattoor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. petition is totally silent as to when the rectification application is pending for disposal. It is bereft of details such as when the rectification petition was filed and disposed by the concerned authorities, etc. In these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the explanation offered by the appellant is not bona fide and genuine. Accordingly, the appellant society had failed to show existence of sufficient reason for the inordinate delay of 511 days. Therefore, it is not a fit case for condonation of delay and the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21st November, 2025.
Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 21st November, 2025 n.p. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin
