KANNUR DISTRICT POLICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,KANNUR vs. ITO, WARD -1 & TPS, KANNUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 67/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 September 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (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 amendment to Section 143(1)(a)(v) allowing such disallowances was effective from April 1, 2021, and thus could not be applied retrospectively to the impugned assessment year (AY 2018-19). Therefore, the disallowance was invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kannur District Police Cooperative Society, claimed deduction under Section 80P for AY 2020-2021. The lower authorities disallowed this deduction through a Section 143(1)(a) processing.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of Section 80P deduction under Section 143(1)(a) processing was valid for AY 2018-19, considering the amendment to Section 143(1)(a)(v) was prospective.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

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 SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 20.08.2024Pronounced: 25.09.2024

This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2020- 2021, arise against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1058349993(1), dated 30.11.2023, in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2 ITA.No.67 & SA.No.3/COCH./2024 Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It appears at the outset that there is hardly had any need for us to give detailed consideration to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance seeking to reverse both the learned lower authorities action disallowing its section 80P deduction claimed by way of section 143(1)(a) processing as upheld in the lower appellate ex-parte discussion. This is for the precise reason that the legislature has amended section 143(1)(a)(v) enabling provision to this effect by way of amendment in the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 whereas the impugned assessment order is AY 2018-19. Meaning thereby that both the learned lower authorities could not have invoked s.143(1)(a)(v) “processing” retrospectively for disallowing assessee’s impugned section 80P deduction. We accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

3.

Delay of 210 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice.

3 ITA.No.67 & SA.No.3/COCH./2024 4. This assessee’s appeal ITA.No.67/Coch./2024 is allowed in above terms and stay application SA.No.03/ Coch./2024 has become infructuous. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.09.2024.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →