THE KUMARAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO 1449 ERICKAVU,ALAPPUZHA vs. ITO, WARD 2, ALAPPUZHA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that filing the return of income within the due date prescribed under section 139(1) is a mandatory condition precedent for claiming deduction under section 80P, as per section 80AC. Non-fulfillment of this condition renders the claim incorrect.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a cooperative society, filed its return of income for AY 2021-22 claiming deduction under section 80P. The return was filed on 31/03/2022, which was after the due date of 15/03/2022. The CPC disallowed the deduction under section 80P based on section 80AC.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80P when the return of income was filed after the due date, violating the conditions of section 80AC?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Shelcon Properties P. Ltd.15 citing370 ITR 305 · 2015 · HC
- 370 ITR 305 (Cal.) and Suolificio Linea Italia (India) (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT3 citing407 ITR 16 · 2018 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A), Panchkula [CIT(A)] dated 16.05.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22.
Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a cooperative society registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. It is classified as primary agricultural credit cooperative society. It is engaged in the business of accepting deposits from members and providing credit facilities to its members. The return of income for The Kumarapuram Service Co-op Bank Ltd No.1449 the A.Y. 2021-22 was filed on 31/03/2022 declaring income of Rs.39,76,959/- after claiming deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. The said return of income was processed by CPC u/s. 143(1) Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') vide intimation dated 02/11/2022 disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80P by holding that the return of income was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act as the appellant filed the return of income on 31/03/2022 as against the due date of 15/03/2022 placing reliance on the provisions of section 80AC of the Act.
Being aggrieved by the said intimation, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) contending that since appellantfiled an application seeking condonation in filing the return of income before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, the appeal should be allowed. However, learned CIT(A) after making reference to the provisions of section 80AC and the judgments of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT vs. Shelcon Properties P. Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 305 (Cal.) and Suolificio Linea Italia (India) (P.) Ltd. vs. JCIT [2018] 407 ITR 16 (Cal.) held that when the conditions precedent laid down by u/s. 80AC of the Act were not fulfilled, the benefit of provisions of section 80P cannot be allowed, as the conditions laid down in section 80AC are mandatory in nature and filing of return of income within due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) is also mandatory.
The Kumarapuram Service Co-op Bank Ltd No.1449 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The issue in present appeal relates to the validity of prima-facie adjustment made by CPC while processing the return of income u/s. 80P by disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. The provisions of section 80AC provides that in order to claim deduction u/s. 80P, the return of income should be filed by an assessee within the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act. It is a condition precedent for claiming deduction u/s. 80P of the Act as held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shelcon Properties P. Ltd. (supra), it is a mandatory condition, non- fulfillment of this condition renders the claim incorrect as defined in section 143(1) of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned CIT(A). Thus, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th August, 2025.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026