SHARADCHANDRA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD -10(1), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A)/NFAC, directing them to condone the delay and decide the matters on merit, citing Supreme Court judgments on substantial justice. The Tribunal also partly deleted the penalty under Section 270A based on a prior ITAT decision allowing a significant portion of the Section 80P deduction.
What were the facts?
The assessee society's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A)/NFAC due to a delay in filing. The assessee claimed the delay was due to the assessment order being sent to an old email address. The assessee also contested additions and penalties related to the disallowance of deductions under Section 80P.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P and the subsequent penalty under Section 270A were justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80P,Section 270A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA
PER BENCH:
ITA No.43/PUN/2026 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.12.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2022-23 confirming the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). ITA No. 44/PUN/2026 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.11.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2022-23 confirming the addition of Rs.1,25,13,425/- made by the Assessing Officer as ‘Income from other sources’. ITA No.45/PUN/2026 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.12.2025 of the Ld. CIT
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026