B P ERGO EMPLOYEE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 252/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 September 2025AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision, granting the assessee one more opportunity to furnish relevant documents and substantiate its claim under Section 80P. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative society, claimed a deduction of Rs. 2,77,113/- under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income from nationalized banks, which was disallowed by the AO and affirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) due to non-compliance and lack of documentary evidence. The tribunal condoned a 17-day delay in filing the appeal by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income from banks, and whether sufficient opportunity was provided to present evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 80P,Section 80P(2)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.252/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18)

B P Ergo Employee Credit Co-op. Society Maryadit, K52, MIDC Hingna Road, Nagpur-440016. PAN: AAAAB 8445 P | Vs. | ITO, Ward-3(4), Nagpur. (Appellant) | (Respondent)

Present for:

Assessee by : Shri Kapil Bahri, Ld. CA.

Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R.

Date of Hearing : 26.06.2025

Date of Pronouncement : 18.09.2025

O R D E R

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 22/01/2025 impugned herein passed by the ADDL/JCIT (Appeals)-1, Siliguri (in short, 'Ld. Commissioner') u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'Act') for the A.Y. 2017-18.

ITA No.252/NAG/2025 (B P Ergo Employee Credit Co-op. Society Maryadit)

filing of the instant appeal. As the reasons stated by the Assessee

2.

At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 17 days in

in the application for condonation of delay which is duly supported

by duly sworn affidavit dated 23/04/2025 are plausible, bonafide

and unintentional, therefore, the delay of 17 days in filing of the

instant appeal is condoned.

3.

Coming to the merits of the case, it is observed that in this

case, vide assessment order dated 18/10/2019 u/sec. 143(3) of the

Act, the Assessing Officer (AO) has made the addition of

Rs.2,77,113/- being 'disallowance of deduction' claimed u/sec.

80P(2)(d) of the Act by the Assessee during the assessment year

under consideration on account of interest income received from

nationalized banks i.e. Central Bank, ICICI Bank and Sahara India

fixed deposits.

4.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, though challenged the said

addition by filing the first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner,

however, despite of affording three opportunities, eventually made

no compliance and, therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the

Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the Assessee affirming

the addition made by the AO. The Ld. Commissioner in the order

specifically observed that Assessee in support of its claim, could not

furnish any documentary evidences of its registration or its

ITA No.252/NAG/2025 (B P Ergo Employee Credit Co-op. Society Maryadit)

contention i.e. cent percent eligible for claiming deduction u/sec.

80P of the Act.

5.

Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in

totality, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial

justice, this Court is inclined to afford one more opportunity to the

Assessee to substantiate its claim before the Ld. Commissioner by

producing the relevant submissions/documents, so that Ld.

Commissioner would be in a position to determine the issue under

consideration in its right perspective and proper manner. Thus, the

case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision

afresh, suffice to say by affording a reasonable opportunity of being

heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to file relevant

submissions/documents before the Ld. Commissioner. It is hereby

clarified that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not

be entitled for any leniency. Thus, the case is accordingly

remanded to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh.

6.

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2025.

Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) JUDICIAL MEMBER

vr/-

Copy to: The Appellant

The Respondent

The CIT, Concerned, Nagpur The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy//

By Order

Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →