CHAITANYA URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOC. LTD,LONAWALA, PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

ITA 1211/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Chaitanya Urban Co.Op Credit Society Ltd., the appellant, contesting the rejection of their Section 80P deduction claim by the Income Tax Officer, Ward \\u2013 9(3), Pune, the respondent. The rejection was based on the grounds that the return was not filed within the 'due date' prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal referenced a similar case, ITA.No.62/NAG./2022, where it was established that the amendment to Section 143(1)(a)(v) by the Finance Act, 2021, which mandates the disallowance of deductions if the return is not filed within the due date, is prospective and not applicable to the assessment year in question.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32607 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2024
• Other Referred Cases: ITO vs. Nagpur Zilla Parishad Primary Shikshah Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Nagpur
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P. MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD SHINGTE

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1211/PUN./2024 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2019-2020 Chaitanya Urban Co.Op Credit Society Ltd., 335, Tirupati Krupa, A-Ward, Bhangarwadi, LONAWALA PIN – 410401. PAN AAABC0190M Maharashtra. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 9(3), PUNE – 411 044. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pramod Shingte For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of Hearing : 03.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10.10.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019- 2020, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1063708714(1), dated 30.03.2024, in proceedings u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised herein challenges correctness of both the learned lower authorities action rejecting it’s sec.80P deduction claim by way of “processing” 2 ITA.No.1211/PUN./2024 dated 16.02.2021 u/sec.143(1)(a)(v) of the Act for not having filed return within the “due date” prescribed u/sec.139(1) of the Act. 3. It further emerges that the instant issue is no more res integra for the precise reason that the Finance Act, 2021 had inserted the necessary amendment to this effect w.e.f. 01.04.2021 carrying prospective operation only whereas we are in assessment year 2019-2020. And that this tribunal’s recent coordinate bench order in ITA.No.62/NAG./2022 ITO vs. Nagpur Zilla Parishad Primary Shikshah Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Nagpur has rejected the Revenue’s very contentions as under : “3. Learned CIT-DR vehemently reiterated the Revenue’s above extracted pleadings that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding the assessee eligible for it’s sec.80P deduction despite the fact that it had not filed it’s return within the “due date” prescribed u/sec.139(1) of the Act. Mr. Kanojiya referred to sec.80AC (ii) that the same is in the nature of a mandatory provision which disentitles the assessee from claiming sec.80P deduction and therefore, the CPC’s processing dated 29.05.2020 herein had rightly rejected the assessee’s claim u/sec.143(1)(a)(v) of the Act. 3 ITA.No.1211/PUN./2024 4. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance canvassed herein as sec.143(1)(a)(v); for the purpose of disallowing the impugned claim under Chapter-VIA of the Act; has been inserted by the Finance Act 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 carries prospective effect only whereas the assessment year before us is assessment year 2019-2020 and that CPC’s processing had rejected the assessee’s claim on 29.05.2020. That being the case, we conclude that the impugned disallowance by way of sec.143(1)(a)(v) processing is not sustainable in law. We accordingly decline the Revenue’s vehement arguments seeking to revive the sec.80P disallowance herein to the tune of Rs.3,01,74,039/- in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 5. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.” 4. We thus adopt judicial consistency to reverse the learned lower authorities action disallowing assessee’s impugned deduction claim(s) by way of sec.143(1)(a)(v) “processing” in very terms. The assessee succeeds in it’s sole substantive grievance in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. 4 ITA.No.1211/PUN./2024 Order pronounced in the open Court on 10.10.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 10th October, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. "