Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a service co-operative bank, faced assessments for AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17. The AO made additions for cash deposits under Section 69 and disallowed deduction under Section 80P because the returns were not filed within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1). The CIT(A) deleted the Section 69 addition but upheld the disallowance of Section 80P deduction, relying on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in *Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham*.
Held
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the assessee is not entitled to deduction under Section 80P. It relied on the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in *Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham* which mandates filing the return of income within the due date under Section 139(1) to claim Section 80P deduction, distinguishing an earlier High Court judgment.
Key Issues
Whether a service co-operative bank is entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if the return of income is not filed within the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 147, 69, 80P, 139(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao
:Asst.Year 2014-2015 :Asst.Year 2015-2016 ITA No.995/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2016-2017 Narakal Service Co-operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Limited No.E-91 v. Ward 2(4) & TPS Narakal P.O. Ernakulam. Ernakulam – 682 505. PAN : AAAAN3554F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Amaljith P.J., CA Respondent by : Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR & Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Date of Hearing :08.04.2025 Pronouncement : 08.04.2025 O R D E R Per George George K, Vice-President : These appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against four separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kochi [“CIT(A)”] (all orders are dated 21.06.2023) passed u/s. 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" hereinafter). The relevant assessment years are (AYs) 2013-14 to 2016-17.
There is a delay of 477 days in filing these appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of these appeals. It is stated in the condonation petition that the assessee had given relevant papers -995/Coch/2024. Narakal SCB Limited for filing appeal before the Tribunal and the Tax Consultant had forwarded Form No.36 also after preparation to the assessee. The assessee was under the bonafide belief that the appeals were already filed and the papers sent from the office of Tax Consultant are for maintenance in its file. It is stated in the condonation petition that only when the department’s appeals were heard by the Tribunal, the assessee came to know that the appeals prepared by the Tax Consultant have not been filed. Immediately the appeals were filed with delay. On perusal of the reasons stated in the condonation petition, we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for belated filing of these appeals and no latches can be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay in filing these appeals and proceed to dispose of the same on merits.
Common issues are raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order.
Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a service co-operative bank, registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. For the assessment years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017, the assessments were completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. In the assessment orders completed, cash deposits made by the members in the various accounts of the assessee co- operative bank were added u/s.69 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the deduction claimed u/s.80P of the Act. The reason for disallowing the deduction claimed u/s.80P of the Act was that the assessee did not file the return of income within the time prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act.
-995/Coch/2024. Narakal SCB Limited 5. Aggrieved by the assessments completed for assessment years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeals of the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO u/s.69 of the Act. As regards the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act is concerned, the CIT(A) following the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham v. CIT (2023) 459 ITR 730 (Ker.) held that since the assessee has not filed the return of income within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act, it is not entitled for deduction u/s.80P of the Act.
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeals before the Tribunal. Revenue also had filed appeals in to 601/Coch/2023 for assessment years 2014-2015 to 2016-2017. However, the same were disposed of without noticing that the assessee’s appeals, vide consolidated order of the Tribunal dated 26.12.2024.
As regards the assessee’s appeals are concerned, the solitary submission of the learned AR is that the CIT(A) has erred in denying the benefit u/s.8OP of the Act. The learned AR relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [(2016) 384 ITR 490 (Ker.)].
The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The solitary issue for our consideration is whether the assessee service co-operative bank is entitled for deduction u/s.80P of the Act, inspite of the return not being filed within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. The issue is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham (supra) had held that for claiming deduction u/s.80P, the assessee-society must make the said claim in the return of income filed within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court had distinguished the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (supra). In the light of the latest judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham (supra), we hold that the assessee service co- operative bank is not entitled for deduction u/s.80P of the Act. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on this 08th day of April, 2025.