THE BADAGARA CO-OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD,VADAGARA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 131/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Judicial Member)2 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn. It granted liberty to the assessee to challenge the processing disallowance of Section 80P deduction through appropriate legal remedies.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed Section 80P deduction, which was rejected during the processing of its return under Section 143(1)(a)(v). The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance. The assessee appealed this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of Section 80P deduction during the processing stage was valid, considering the amendment to Section 143(1)(a)(v) and the assessee's failure to appeal the initial processing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)(a)(v),Section 80P,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Narayanan, CA
For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Hearing: 16.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2020-21 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/106082502(1) dated 12.02.2024 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Heard both parties. Case file perused.

2.

Mr. Narayanan, learned counsel, vehemently argues that both the lower authorities have wrongly rejected its section 80P deduction claim in section 143(1)(a)(v) “processing” followed by section 144B assessment dated 19.09.2022 as upheld in CIT(A)’s order. He seeks to buttress the point that the legislature has Badagara Co-op. Rural Bank Ltd. amended section 143(1)(a)(v) vide Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 whereas we are in AY 2020-21 and therefore such a disallowance is hardly sustainable in law.

3.

Learned CIT-DR, on the other hand, highlighted the fact that the CIT(A) could not have allowed he assessee’s deduction claim once the latter had not come in appeal again the 143(1)(a)(v) processing in question.

4.

Faced with this situation, we reject assessee’s instant appeal for the very reason with liberty to challenge the foregoing processing disallowing its section 80P deduction as per law by availing appropriate remedy, if so advised. It goes without saying that the appropriate authority shall indeed consider the foregoing statutory amendment to decide the same as per law. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in above terms.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →