THE PAVARATTY SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 3918,PAVARATTY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1& TPS, GURUVAYUR
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that it does not have the power to condone the delay in filing returns, as this power rests with the CBDT. Therefore, the appeal could not be allowed without a decision from the CBDT.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80P but was denied by the AO for not filing the income-tax return within the due date. The assessee's application for condonation of delay before the CBDT was pending.
What were the issues?
Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can allow deduction under Section 80P when the return was filed belatedly and the application for condonation of delay is pending before the CBDT.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
O R D E R
Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :
The present appeal of the assessee along with stay application are arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 22nd April, 2024 and relates to the assessment year 2023-2024.
The short issue involved in this appeal is that the Assessing Officer (AO), i.e., the CPC, Bangalore, has not allowed the deduction of section 80P of the Act to the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to file the income-tax return within the due date. Thereafter, the assessee has filed an application u/s.119(2)(b) before the CBDT praying for & SA 180/Coch/2024. The Pavaratty SCB Limited condonation of delay in filing the return of income. The same is pending with the CBDT till date. However, the learned jurisdictional AO without appreciating the outcome of the petition filed before the CBDT, disallowed the deduction and passed the order on 19th February, 2024.
Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and craved for the deduction of sec.80P of the Act. However, the ld.CIT(A) relying on the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in dated 31st October, 2022 in the case of Janki Vaishali Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. CIT(A), dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Now the assessee has come up in appeal before us. The learned AR assailed the order of the CIT(A) and contended that deduction u/s.80P may kindly be allowed.
The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
After considering the rival submissions, the bench has put up a question before the AR as to whether the CBDT has decided the petition of the assessee, to which the AR of the assessee pointed out that the same is pending before the CBDT till date. Therefore, having regard to the fact that the ITAT has no power to condone the delay for accepting belated return, which power squarely is in the domain of the CBDT, and hence, it cannot be possible to condone the delay. The appeal & SA 180/Coch/2024. The Pavaratty SCB Limited of the assessee is dismissed with a rider that in case there has been denied any relief by the CBDT, then the assessee is free to take further action in accordance with law.
Since we have disposed of the appeal, the corresponding stay becomes infructuous, and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal as well as the stay application filed by the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced on this 09th day of December, 2024.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Karo Sambhav Private Limited Through Its Director Mr. Pranshu Singhal vs. Additional/Joint Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax, Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 31 Oct 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026