THE KOODARANHI SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 February 2024AY 2019-20Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a) to deny the deduction under Section 80P due to late filing was not maintainable. This is because the relevant amendment to Section 80AC, which would allow such an adjustment, was not in effect at the time.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative bank, claimed a deduction under Section 80P. The return was filed beyond the due date specified under Section 139(1), leading to the denial of the deduction under Section 80AC. This denial was made via an intimation under Section 143(1).

What were the issues?

Whether the denial of deduction under Section 80P via an intimation under Section 143(1) is permissible when the return is filed beyond the due date, considering the provisions of Section 80AC and the effective date of amendments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Johnson George, CA
For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Pronounced: 12.02.2024

Appellant by: Shri Johnson George, CA Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 12 02.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 12.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order dated 17.02.2023 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, dismissing the assessee’s appeal contesting the denial of deduction under section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on processing of it’s return of income for assessment year (AY) 2019-2020 vide Intimation u/s. 143(1) dated 16.06.2020.

2.

The denial of deduction u/s.80P in the instant case has been on account of application of s.80AC of the Act, which, with effect from 01.04.2018, bars the claim of deduction, inter alia, under any provision falling under Chapter VI-A (Part-C), where not made per a return filed within the time specified u/s.139(1). The return in the instant case has been admittedly filed on 12/03/2020, i.e., beyond the extended period of time allowed for filing the original return, i.e., 31.10.2019. The claim u/s.80P, made at Rs.1,64,27,700, was accordingly disallowed vide Intimation u/s.143(1), raising a demand for Rs.71,83,695.

(AY : 2019-20) Koodaranhi Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. ITO

3.

The issue before us is the maintainability of the Revenue’s action in denying the assessee it’s claim for deduction u/s.80P on processing u/s. 143(1)(a). This Tribunal has, vide a detailed order in Kollad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. ITO(in dated 25.9.2023), found the adjustment u/s.143(1)(a)(ii), which has been applied in the instant case as well, as not maintainable, as indeed u/s. 143(1)(a)(v) where the same is prior to 01.04.2021, i.e., the date on which the corresponding amendment, with reference to sec.80AC, stands made thereto. As explained therein, the adjustment is outside the scope of s. 143(1)(a)(ii), while that u/s. 143(1)(a)(v) could not be given effect to prior to 01/4/2021, as obtains in the instant case.

4.

No contrary argument stands advanced, or decision relied upon by the Revenue; that cited by it in Kollad SCB Ltd. (supra) found distinguishable. The said order has in fact been followed by this Bench of the Tribunal in other appeals as well, going to the extent of stating it to be a mistake, as in Mavelikara Aided School Employee’s Cooperative Society Ltd. v. ITO (ITA No. 974/Coch/2022, dated 9/10/2023). The decision is supported by orders by other Benches as well.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →