Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA No.539 & 540/Coch/2023 ALONG WITH S.A.Nos.113 & 114/Coch./2023 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2009-2010 The Vattanathra Service Co- operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer No.499 Ward 2(1) Thrissur. VAttanathra P.O. Thrissur – 680 302. PAN : AACAT5008N. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Ramdas,CA Respondent by : Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2024 Date of Hearing : 23.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.539 & 540/ Coch/2023 along with it’s stay applications S.A.Nos.113 & 114/Coch./2023, for assessment years 2010-11 & 2009- 2010, arise against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Delhi’s DIN & Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1052930153(1) and 1052924507(1), both dated 17.05.2023, in proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 and sec.154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”]; case-wise; respectively.
2 ITA Nos.540 & 539 along with SA.Nos.114 & 113/Coch/2023. The Vattanathra SC.B Limited. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing in the assessee’s “lead” appeal ITA.No.539/Coch./2023 for assessment year 2010-2011 that both the learned lower authorities have quoted sec.80A(5) for rejecting assessee’s sec.80P deduction claim on the ground that it had filed its return claiming the same “belatedly”.
Learned DR strongly relies upon the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion seeking to distinguish the hon’ble jurisdictional high court decision in Chirakkal Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [(2016) 384 ITR 490 (Ker.)]. by way of some other judgments wherein 80A(5) was nowhere applicable.
Faced with this situation, we are of the considered view that even a belated return, prior to sec.80AC amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2018, is eligible for 80P deduction and therefore, there is no reason for us to uphold ld.CIT(A)’s findings herein. We thus deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh decision on merits in above terms. Ordered accordingly.
The assessee’s latter appeal ITA.No.540/Coch./2023 also follows the suit since involving sec.154 consequential rectification. Ordered accordingly.
3 ITA Nos.540 & 539 along with SA.Nos.114 & 113/Coch/2023. The Vattanathra SC.B Limited. 6. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA.Nos.539 & 540/Coch /2023 are allowed for statistical purposes and it’s stay applications SA.Nos.113 & 114/Coch/2023 are dismissed as rendered infructuous. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 7th day of November, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (Amarjit Singh) (Satbeer Singh Godara) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin ; Dated : 7th November, 2024. Devadas G* Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT Concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin