BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

22 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80P(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune225Mumbai215Chennai174Bangalore145Cochin133Panaji92Kolkata48Ahmedabad44Hyderabad32Raipur30Delhi29Jaipur28Nagpur28Visakhapatnam22Chandigarh20Lucknow18Indore17Karnataka16Surat14Rajkot13Patna4Jabalpur2Calcutta2Jodhpur1Amritsar1Guwahati1Agra1SC1

Key Topics

Section 80P42Section 142(1)22Deduction17Section 14416Section 139(1)14Condonation of Delay14Section 80P(2)(a)10Section 148A10Section 143(3)

THE KRISHNA DISTRICT MILK PRODUCERS MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , VIJAYAWADA

ITA 43/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT DR
Section 263

4. On the contrary, ld. DR refuted the claim of the Assessee and specifically submitted that filing of the instant appeal with application for condonation of delay is an afterthought and therefore this appeal is liable to be dismissed in limine with heavy costs. 5. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The law is well settled

THE KRISHNA DISTRICT MILK PRODUCERS MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VIJAYAWADA

ITA 42/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

9
Addition to Income9
Section 143(1)8
Disallowance6
22 Mar 2021
AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT DR
Section 263

4. On the contrary, ld. DR refuted the claim of the Assessee and specifically submitted that filing of the instant appeal with application for condonation of delay is an afterthought and therefore this appeal is liable to be dismissed in limine with heavy costs. 5. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The law is well settled

PANDALAPAKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,EAST GODAVARI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

ITA 438/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Jan 2025AY 2020-21
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

80P of the\nAct. We therefore find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) thereby\ndismissing the grounds of the assessee on merits. Thus Ground No. 4 raised\nby the assessee is dismissed.\n\n19. Ground No. 5 & 6 are general in nature and needs no adjudication.\n\n20. In the result, appeal of the assessee

OMMI SANDEEP,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

ITA 507/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay of 24 days\nPage No. 2\nin filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on\nmerits in the following paragraphs.\n4.\nThe only issue to be adjudicated in the above cited appeal is whether the\nAppellant Cooperative Society is entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i)\nof the Act, when

NO H 1043 BHUJABALAPATNAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal. The Petitioner/Appellant Society Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, Wherein It Was Submitted That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Was Sent To The Email Of Its Then Ar, Ca B.V. Rao, Instead Of Its Email "Krishnapacs085@Gmail.Com," As Had Been Requested By It. The Appellant Society Came To Know Of The Order Only When Itd Officials Called Upon It To Pay The Tax Arrears. It Further Submitted That, Due To The Above Circumstances Beyond Its Control & Prayed That The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal May Please Be Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & That The Appeal Be Decided On Merits.

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay of 69 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. The appellant/assessee is a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee has not furnished its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on or before the due date

SRI LAKSHMI VENKATESWARA MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 140/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Feb 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)

condone the delay of 346\ndays in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the\nappeal on merits in the following paragraphs.\n4. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is a cooperative society registered\nunder AP State Mutually Aided Co-operative Societies Act 1995 and has been\ncarrying the business of credit among the members

ADIMULAM SATYANARAYANA PROPRIETOR,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 472/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 13Section 133(6)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

delay and allowed him to file his return of income under section 139(4) r.w.s 119(2)(b) of the Act for the subject year, but the assessee failed to furnish the same. 10. The AO based on the aforesaid facts holding a conviction that the assessee had failed to come forth with any explanation regarding the source

THE P A C S NOH 1002,PACS VELVADAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(5), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 199/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.199/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The P.A.C.S Noh 1002 V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 3(5) Pacs Velvadam, Velvadam Post C.R. Building Mylavaram, Krishna District – 521230 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aabap8170G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Brief facts of the case are, assessee is a society rendering services and providing credit facilities to its members. Assessee has not filed return of income under section

THE CHINAOGIRALA PACS LTD,CHINAOGIRALA VILLAGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, GUDIVADA, GUDIVADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 296/VIZ/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.296/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21) The Chinaogirala Pacs Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chinaogirala Village, Ward-1, Vuyyuru Mandal, Gudivada, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh-521301. Andha Pradesh-521245. Pan: Aacat 8188 M (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

condoning the delay in filing the appeal though the delay was due to the circumstances beyond the control and with no comments on the grounds of appeal. The Andhra Pradesh high court held in the case of Pinjari Khasim v Chanda Saheb, 2023 SCC OnLine AP 698, decided on 28-03-2023 that “…. ordinarily the litigation should not be terminated

PANDALAPAKA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,EAST GODAVARI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER-WARD-1, KAKINADA

ITA 437/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.437 & 438/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21) Pandalapaka Primary Agricultural V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Income Tax Office Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Deepthi Towers 5-28/1, Pandalapaka Main Road, Kakinada – 533001 Biccavole Mandal – 533345 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aabap2382G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

condonation of delay and read out the contents of the petition which is as under: Page No. 11 I.T.A.Nos.437 & 438/VIZ/2024 Pandalapaka Primary Agricultural Co-op Credit Society Ltd., “1. That the society has filed a return of income for the Assessment Year2020-21 on 28.12.2020 returning a taxable income of NIL after claiming deduction under section 80P 2 That

THE TENALI PT EMPLOYEES MUTUALLY AIDED CO OP THRIFT CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,TENALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TENALI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 361/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 361/Viz/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) The Tenali P & T Employees V. Income Tax Officer - Ward – 1 Mutually Aided Co-Op Thrift & Income Tax Office Credit Society Limited Opp. Sai Baba Temple, Bose Road D.No. 22-5-60, Sarojini Naidu Street Tenali – 522201, Andhra Pradesh Tanali – 522201 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aacat9757E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 143(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 01.05.2020. 2. At the outset, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.AR”], inviting our attention to the order of the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 526 days in filing the appeal stating that submissions are vague and dismissed the appeal

THE FARMERS SERVICE CO-OP LTD.,,RANASTHALAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 310/VIZ/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.310/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2020-21) The Farmers Service Co-Op. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ranasthalam, Ward-1, Srikakulam-532407. Srikakulam. Pan: Aabtt 4377 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri I Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condonation of delay along with the affidavit and the relevant paras of the affidavit is extracted herein below for reference: “1……. 2…… 3…… 4…… 5…… 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC vide his order dated 14/7/2003 disallowed the claim for deduction under section 80P

THE VAZRAPUKOTTURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 439/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.439/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Vazrapukotturu Primary V. Ito – Ward – 1 Income Tax Office, Aaykar Bhavan Agricultural Cooperative Credit Palakonda Road, Srikakulam – 532001 Society Limited Andhra Pradesh D.No. 12-3-71, Gandhi Nagar Kasibugga, Palasa, Srikakulam [Pan: Aadat1897J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 80P

80P of the Act in the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act. 8. In this connection, at the outset, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that the assessee has filed the condonation of Page No. 4 I.T.A.No.439/VIZ/2024 The Vazrapukotturu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited delay

THE FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 166/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.166/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Farmers Service Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1, Srikakulam. Srikakulam. Pan: Aabtt4377L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

condonation of delay along with the affidavit and the relevant paras of the affidavit is extracted herein below for reference: “1……. 2…….. 3. The in the computation sheet accompanying the order the business income of the assessee is taken at Rs. 48,34,258/- as against the income from business before deduction under 80P returned by the assessee

THE MUNDLAPADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MUNDLAPADU VILLAGE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 250/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.250/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) The Mundlapadu Primary Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Credit Ward-1(3), Society Limited, Mundlapadu Vijayawada. Village & Post, Penuganchiprolu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh – 521190. Pan: Aacat7977J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt. A. Aruna, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80A(5)Section 80P

condone the delay of 06 days in 3 filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited. As per the information available with the Department, the assessee has deposited cash

THE SALUR GIRIJAN CO OP MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 118/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(f)

Section 144 and 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), respectively, for A.Y. 2020-21. As common issues are involved in the captioned appeals, therefore, the same are taken up and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2020-21 in wherein

THE SALURU GIRIJAN CO OP MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED,SALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 117/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(f)

Section 144 and 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), respectively, for A.Y. 2020-21. As common issues are involved in the captioned appeals, therefore, the same are taken up and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2020-21 in wherein

THE KONAYAPALEM PACS LTD.,CHANDARLAPADU MANDAL vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 126/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.126/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) The Konayapalem Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Credit Ward-(3), Society Limited, Konayapalem Vijayawada. Village, Chandarlapadu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh – 521182. Pan: Aacat 6987 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Asrss Siva Prasad, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri ASRSS Siva Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80A(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay of 97 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd [PACS]. During the AY 2017-18, as per the information available with the Department

THE ANIGANDLAPADU PACS LTD,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(1)1 VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 300/VIZ/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.300/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21) The Anigandlapadu Pacs Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer 10-1, Anigandlapadu Village Ward-1(1) Penuganchiprolu Post Vijayawada Penuganchiprolu Mandal Krishna Dist. [Pan : Aacat7983Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri ASRSS Sivaprasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 56Section 80P

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society, provides credit facilities to it’s members i.e. sanction of crop loans out of deposits collected from it’s members. It also provides services i.e. supply of fertilisers and manures, marketing

SAGARA VIKASA MUTUALLY AIDED COOP THRIFT SOCIETY LTD ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 235/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.235/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sagara Vikasa Mutually Aided Coop Vs. Income Tax Officer Thrift Society Ltd., Ward-2(1) Opp. Sun School Visakhapatnam Near Vuda Layout, Bheemunipatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aacas9620H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 10ASection 11Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80P

80P of the Act. The Ld.AR contended that the disallowance is outside the scope of adjustment that could be made in intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act. The Ld.AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji 207 ITR 368 and contended that section 139(4) is only