THE UPPILIPALAYAM MILL INDUSTRIAL WORKERS COOP HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 1(4), COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3898/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 February 2026AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) was due to the absence of an accountant and was not deliberate. The Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the orders of the CIT(A), and restored the appeals for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Co-operative Credit Society, filed its return for AY 2020-21 declaring income of Rs. 1,78,640 after claiming deductions. The case was selected for scrutiny, and notices were issued. The assessment was completed with an addition of Rs. 1,78,436 and a penalty. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals due to delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable? Whether the appeals should be adjudicated on merits despite the delay?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 20.02.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

1.

This captioned Appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] both dated 29.10.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21.

Brief Facts of the case: The Appellant being Co-operative Credit 2.

Society, nature of activity is providing financial assistance to its & 3897/Chny/2025 (AY 2020-21 & 2020-21) The Uppilipalayam Mill Industrial Workers Coop House Const So Ltd Vs ITO NCWQ 1(4) Coimbatore Members and eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) for the Gross Total Income of the Appellant as per Return of Income.

The assessee has filed its return of income for the A.Y.2020-21 on 08.01.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 1,78,640/- after claiming deduction under Chapter VI-A of Rs. 36,99,754/-. The case of the assessee was selected for 'complete Scrutiny' through CASS to examine assessee's claim of deduction under chapter VI-A and issued notice u/s 143(2) dated 29.06.2021. Again notice u/s. 142(1) issued to assessee dated 29.10.2021 but no response had been received from assessee's end; another notice issued to him dated 23.11.2021 was complied with. Assessment was completed whereby Total Income was assessed at Rs.3,57,076/- after making an addition of Rs. 1,78,436/- and also imposed penalty u/s 270A of the Act. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals on account of delay.

3.

Before us, appellant has requested for condonation of delay. We find that there is delay in filing of appeal of 389 & 238 days and the cause for such inordinate delay has been mentioned as due to absence of an accountant. The main grievance of the assessee is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal as time barred & 3897/Chny/2025 (AY 2020-21 & 2020-21) The Uppilipalayam Mill Industrial Workers Coop House Const So Ltd Vs ITO NCWQ 1(4) Coimbatore without appreciating the delay that was neither deliberate nor intentional and was supported by reasonable cause.

4.

At the outset, we note that the Ld.CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal in limine on account of delay of 289 and 238 days in filing the captioned petitions before CIT (A).

5.

We find that the reasons given by the assessee are sufficient cause. Hence, we condone the delay and set aside the both orders of CIT(A) and restored back files to the CIT(A) for adjudication of an appeal afresh on merits as per the ground of appeal

filed by the assessee in Form

35. The Ld.CIT(A) before proceeding to re- adudicate the both appeals of assessee shall give proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee to appear and prosecute its appeals. The assessee is also directed to prosecute its appeals diligently and participate in the appellate proceedings without any failure.

6.

In the result, both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical. Order pronounced on the 20th day of February 2026, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →