VIVIDHA KARYAKARI CO-OP SOCIETY,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 76/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 June 2025AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal referred to a jurisdictional High Court ruling (Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable Trust) which held that a return filed belatedly under Section 139(4), along with the necessary documentation for claiming deductions, satisfies the requirements. The Tribunal found the assessee's case similar.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income belatedly due to the Covid-19 pandemic, but prior to the due date under Section 139(4). The AO/CPC disallowed deductions claimed under various sub-sections of Section 80P. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowances, citing the belated filing of the return.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of deductions under Section 80P is justified when the return of income was filed belatedly but within the extended time under Section 139(4), and the audit report was filed within the prescribed time.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 139(4),Section 131(4),Section 80P(2)(d),Section 80P(2)(a)(i)(iv),Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 11(1),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 18.06.2025Pronounced: 18.06.2025

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 08/11/2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. ADDL/ JCIT (A)–2, Chennai [in short, “Ld.Commissioner”] u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (for short, “AY”) 2021-22.

2 ITA.No.76/NAG/2025 2. Admittedly, the assessee has filed the audited report within the prescribed time, however, due to Covid–19 pandemic when the entire nation was on–hold, committed default for not filing the return of income within the time prescribed. Admittedly, the assessee filed the same on 26/03/2022 i.e. prior to the time available for filing of return of income u/sec. 139(4) i.e. upto 31/03/2022. But, still the A.O./CPC vide intimation order dated 02/11/2022 disallowed the deduction claimed to the tune of ` 45,73,882/–, ` 1,50,515/–, `5,31,335/–, `38,39,032/– respectively u/sec. 80P(2)(d), 80P(2)(a)(i)(iv) & 80P(2)(a)(i). The assessee being aggrieved with the said intimation, filed first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however, of no avail as the Ld. Commissioner by taking cognizance of return filed by the assessee belatedly and not as per the parameters set out u/sec. 131(4), dismissed the appeal and affirmed the aforesaid disallowances made by the A.O./CPC. Therefore, the assessee being aggrieved has preferred this instant appeal.

3.

Admittedly, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Trustee of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable & Chaleshwar Temple Trust vs. CIT (207 ITR 368)(Bom–HC) has also dealt with an identical issue, wherein the return, by the assessee, was filed belatedly as per the provisions of sec. 139(4) of the Act. The Hon'ble Court by considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, ultimately held “that if a return is filed within the time specified in sub–section (4) of section 139 of the Act and the option contemplated by the Explanation to sec.11(1) is exercised in writing along with such return, the requirements of the Explanation to sec. 11(1) would stand satisfied”. The spirit of dictum and by the Hon'ble High Court is very much clear. As in the instant case, the assessee has shown its intention for claiming deduction by filing the audit report within the time prescribed and by filing the 3 ITA.No.76/NAG/2025 return of income belatedly has also claimed the said deduction. Even otherwise either of the authorities below had been rejected such return. Therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in totality, this Court is inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee and consequently directing the jurisdictional A.O. to verify the deduction claimed by the assessee u/sec. 11 of the Act and grant the relief accordingly. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for limited purpose of verification.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18.06.2025.

More judgments on Section 139(4)

All 902 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →