THE KANTHALLORE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,IDUKKI vs. ITO , WARD-1 & TPS, THODUPUZHA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 552/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 November 2024AY 2019-20Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CPC lacked the power to disallow Section 80P deduction during Section 143(1) processing for AY 2019-20, as this power was granted later. Therefore, the adjustment made by the CPC was beyond its scope.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative bank, claimed deduction under Section 80P for AY 2019-20. The CPC disallowed this deduction during processing under Section 143(1) because the return was filed after the due date.

What were the issues?

Whether the CPC had the authority to disallow a Section 80P deduction while processing the return under Section 143(1) for AY 2019-20.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 143(1),Section 139(1),Section 80AC(2)

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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 29.10.2024Pronounced: 18.11.2024

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 06.01.2023 for Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act ad is engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee filed return of income for AY 2019-20 on 14.07.2020disclosing an income of Rs. 47,75,569/- claiming deduction u/s. 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at Rs. 47,75,569/- . The said return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 14.03.2020 disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80P of Rs. 47,75,569/- on the ground that the return of income was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act.

Kanthallor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order placing reliance of the provisions of section 80AC(2) of the Act and also on the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case Prashant Projects Ltd. vs. DCIT [2013] 37 taxmann.com 137 dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. When the appeal was called nobody attended despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore after hearing the learned Sr. DR, I proceeded to dispose of the appeal as under.

5.

The short issue that arises for my consideration is whether or not the action of the CPC in disallowing the claim for deduction u/s. 80P is justified. The CPC while processing the return of income could only make such adjustments as specified under clauses (i) to (v). It is only by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 the parliament had empowered the CPC to make adjustment u/s. 80P under sub-clauses (1) to (v) of section 143(1) of the Act. Since the year under consideration before me is only AY 2019-20 the CPC has no power to make such adjustment when the legislative intent is clear. It is beyond the scope of the power of CPC making adjustment u/s. 80P while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Therefore, I direct the CPC to amend the intimation u/s. 143(1) by deleting the adjustment made by disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →