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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 436/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 December 2023AY 2019-20Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Shri Manomohan Das (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a) for denying the deduction under Section 80P due to Section 80AC was not maintainable. This was because the amendment to Section 143(1)(a)(v) concerning Section 80AC was effective from April 1, 2021, and the current assessment year predates this.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80P, but it was denied as the return was filed beyond the due date, triggering Section 80AC. The 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 valid when the return was filed beyond the due date, considering the provisions of Section 80AC and the effective date of amendments to Section 143(1).

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, AM &Shri Manomohan Das, JM

For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Hearing: 23.11.2023

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.436/Coch/2023
SP No. 80/Coch/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Date of Date of Hearing : 23.11.2023 Pronouncement: 11.12.2023 O R D E R

Per Sanjay Arora, AM:

1.

This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order dated 04.05.2023 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 15.6.2020.

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 11.3.2020, 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.1,97,07,290 was accordingly disallowed vide Intimation u/s.143(1), raising a demand for Rs.86,16,902.

SP 80/Coch/2023 Mukkom 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, i.e., with reference to sec.80AC, stands made in s.143(1)(a)(v). 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.

5.

In view of the foregoing, we find no reason for sustaining the impugned disallowance. We direct accordingly, and the assessee succeeds. It’s appeal having been disposed of, the stay petition becomes infructuous, and is dismissed as such.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →