Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a cooperative credit society, claimed a deduction of Rs. 59,75,316/- under section 80P(2)(a)(i) for AY 2018-19, filing a nil income return on 08.10.2018. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the claim, citing a belated return and the assessee's failure to furnish details, a decision upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee filed an appeal to the ITAT with a delay of 334 days.
Held
The ITAT condoned the 334-day delay in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation of consultant negligence. It found that the return filed on 08.10.2018 was not belated, as the CBDT had extended the due date for AY 2018-19 to 31.10.2018. However, recognizing the assessee's failure to furnish details regarding the 80P claim during assessment, the ITAT set aside the matter and remanded it to the AO to allow the assessee a fresh opportunity to furnish the required details for a merits-based examination.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Whether the return of income for AY 2018-19 was filed belatedly, affecting the deduction claim under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). 3. Whether the assessee provided sufficient details for the 80P claim during assessment proceedings.
Sections Cited
Section 80P, Section 80P(2)(a)(i), Section 144, Section 144B, Section 234A, Section 234B, Section 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], dated 08.05.2024 for the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2018-19 in the proceeding u/s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’].
There was a delay of 334 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit. It is explained that the assessee is a cooperative credit society Shree Yogeshwar Co. Op. Credit Soc. Ltd. Vs.ITO, AY- 2018-19 2 engaged in business of giving loan to its members and that its income was exempt under section 80P of the Income Tax Act. Further that the office-bearers of the society are farmers and not conversant with Income-tax proceedings. It is explained that the assessee had appointed a consultant to look after the Income-tax proceedings, who neither attended the proceedings nor informed the assessee about passing of order by the AO as well as by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee had changed his consultant in the course of appeal proceeding and had requested the Ld. CIT(A) to allow further time for making compliance. It has been explained that the assessee had sought adjournment on the last date of hearing, which was rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) and the ex- parte order passed by him, which was mailed to the email-id of the earlier counsel, which was not communicated to the assessee in time. As a result, there was delay in filing the present appeal. Considering the explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 08.10.2018 declaring nil income. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS. In the course of assessment, the AO had inquired about deduction of Rs.59,75,316/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. No explanation was given by the assessee in this regard. Neither any compliance was made in the course of assessment proceeding. Therefore, the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The AO had also given a finding that the return of the assessee was filed belatedly on 08.10.2018 and, therefore it was not entitled to claim any Shree Yogeshwar Co. Op. Credit Soc. Ltd. Vs.ITO, AY- 2018-19 3 deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act on 20.04.2021 at total income of Rs.89,87,316/-.
Aggrieved with the order of the A.O., the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:
1. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of the assessee denying exemption u/s. 80P to the assessee being co- operative credit society without properly appreciating the facts and the written submission dated 01.05.2024 uploaded vide Ack. No. 195947081010524.
(2) He has erred in law and on facts in upholding the income of Rs. 89,87,316/-assessed by the A.O. as against NIL income returned by the assessee society by claiming income exempt u/s. 80P of the I.T.Act, 1961 in as much as that it being old society, the facts of income being exempt u/s. 80P are on the record of Department for various previous years also duly upheld by the appellate authorities.
(3) He has erred in law and on facts in upholding the claim of the assessee u/s 80P by wrongly holding that the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 has been filed belatedly on 08.10.2018 in as much as that the return has been filed in time as the time was extended by the CBDT from 30.09.2018 to 31.10.2018 and wrongly applying the decision of Shivanand Electronic - 209 ITR - 63 to the facts of the assessee.
(4) On the facts of the assessee the exemption u/s. 80P ought not to have been denied.
(6) For delay of about 358 days in filing this appeal, there being reasonable cause as explained as per Affidavit, the appellant prays for condo nation of delay and admission of appeal.
(7) The appellant craves leave to add, to alter and/or to modify any grounds of appeal.
6. Shri. P. F. Jain, CA and Ld. A.R of the assessee submitted that there was no delay in filing the return of income for the current year. He explained that the due date of filing of return for assessment year 2018- 19 was 30th September, which was extended to 31st October 2018 by the CBDT. Considering this fact, the return of income filed by the assessee on 08.10.2018 was within the due date. Therefore, the AO was not correct in disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on the ground that the return of income was not filed within the due date.
Per contra, Shir. Rameshwar P Meena, Ld. Sr. D.R, submitted that the assessee did not furnish any details in respect of deduction of Rs. 59,75,316/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Therefore, the claim of the assessee was not examined on merits in the course of assessment. He therefore, requested that the matter may be set aside to the file of the AO with a direction to examine the claim of the assessee on merits.
We have considered the rival submissions. The AO had disallowed the deduction of Rs. 59,75,316/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) for the reason that the return of income was filed belatedly and no details in this respect was filed in the course of assessment. From the evidences Shree Yogeshwar Co. Op. Credit Soc. Ltd. Vs.ITO, AY- 2018-19 5 brought on record, it is found that the due date of filing of return for this year was extended by the CBDT till 31st October, 2018 and considering this fact the return filed by the assessee on 08.10.2018 was not belated. Therefore, the disallowance of the claim made u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act cannot be sustained for this reason. At the same time, it is found that the AO had called for the details of the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act in the course of assessment which was not complied by the assessee and no details in this regard was furnished. Thus, the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) was not examined on merits. In the interest of justice, we, therefore, deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of Jurisdictional A.O. with a direction to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish the details in respect of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. At the same time, the assessee is also directed to make compliance before the AO in the course of set aside proceeding and furnish the details in respect of 80P(2)(a)(i) claim and also furnish other details and clarifications as required by the A.O. in this regard. In case the assessee does not comply in the course of set aside proceeding, the JAO will have liberty to pass the order on merits on basis of materials available on record.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the Court on 20/01/2026 at Ahmedabad.