MALANADU CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPEMENT BANK LTD,NEDUMANGAD vs. ITO, WARD-1 & TPS, THODUPUZHA

Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive ground that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in rejecting it’s sec.80P deduction claim, the clinching fact which emerges from a perusal of the case file is that the same had never been claimed in “a return” as per sec.80A(5) of the Act. Case law EBR Enterprises vs. Union of India [2019] 415 ITR 139 (Bom.) is found to have already settled the issue in Revenue’s favour. We thus uphold the CIT(A)-NFAC’s impugned findings to this effect in page-3 paras 4.3 to 5 of the lower appellate discussion.

We make it clear before parting that although the legislature has amended sec.80AC(ii) w.e.f. 01.04.2018 that a return in such an instance has to be filed within “due” date u/sec.139(1) of the Act, the same does not apply as sec.80A(5) specific condition is not that if filing sec.139(1) return but in raising such relief in “a return” only. Rejected accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.