K 113 KUGALUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOP CREDIT SOCIETY,KUGALUR,GOBI TK V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC, BANGALORE

ITA 99/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. K 113 Kugalur Primary Agricultural Coop Credit Society, which appealed against the order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA) that denied their claim for a deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore, had initially processed the return and issued an intimation denying the set-off of brought forward losses due to late filing in the previous year. The FAA upheld this decision, leading to the present appeal. The Tribunal, referencing a Supreme Court judgment and a Madras High Court decision, concluded that the FAA erred in not entertaining the deduction claim and remanded the matter back to the AO for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705328 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT, CIT vs. Abhinitha Foundation (P) Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWIN D GOWDA
• Assessee Lawyers: R.RESHMA
• Keywords: Co-operative Credit Society

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ (एस एम सी), ᭠यायपीठ,चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी जॉजᭅ जॉजᭅ, उपा᭟यᭃ के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 99/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. K 113 Kugalur Primary Agricultural Coop Credit Society, 23-Bank Road, Kugalur, Gobi Taluk Erode – 638 313 PAN: AABAK 3364K Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Erode (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. R. Reshma, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Ashwin D Gowda, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 02.07.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Addl / JCIT(A)-3, Mumbai dated 23.10.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19. ITA No.99/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. The solitary issue argued by the Ld.AR is whether the First Appellate Authority is justified in not entertaining the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society registered under the TamilNadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. It is engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. For the assessment year 2018-19, return of income (ROI) was filed on 24.07.2018 (within the due date specified) claiming set-off of carry forward losses. Intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act was issued by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore on 31.05.2019, wherein the assessee’s claim of set-off was denied for the reason that for the earlier years in which loss has been computed (loss computed for assessment year 2017-18), assessee had not filed its ROI within the due date specified. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act, assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Before the FAA, the assessee by placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs. CIT reported in [2021] 431 ITA No.99/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: ITR 1 (SC), submitted that assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The FAA however, rejected the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act since assessee had not made the claim in the return filed and hence, held that there is no mistake in the order of the intimation passed by the CPC, Bangalore. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee reiterated the submissions made before the FAA. 6. The Ld.DR has filed brief written submissions dated 07.05.2025 and 02.06.2025. The content of the same is that assessee had not made the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act and in light of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd., vs. CIT reported in [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC), the AO cannot entertain a new claim which is not made in the ROI. 7. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee for the relevant assessment year 2018-19 had declared ‘nil’ income after claiming set-off of brought forward losses of Rs.2,37,001/-. The CPC processed the return filed ITA No.99/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: u/s.139(1) of the Act and issued intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 31.05.2019. The CPC disallowed the set-off of brought forward losses as the return for the earlier assessment year namely 2017-18 was filed beyond the due date prescribed rendering the losses ineligible for carry forward u/s.80 r.w.s.139(3) of the Act. The FAA dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that assessee never made the claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act in its return filed for the relevant assessment year. 8. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Abhinitha Foundation (P) Ltd., reported in [2017] 396 ITR 251 (Madras) considered the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd., (supra). The Hon’ble High Court after quoting the relevant part of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd., held that power to consider a new claim not claimed in ROI does not impinge the power of appellate authority. In the instant case, admittedly assessee had claimed deduction u/s.80P of the Act before the FAA. In light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court cited supra, the FAA is not justified in not entertaining the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. On the facts of the instant ITA No.99/Chny/2025 :- 5 -: case, assessee had filed the return of income for the relevant assessment year within the due date prescribed. The assessee being a primary agricultural co-operative credit society would be entitled to deduction u/s.80P of the Act provided conditions mentioned therein are satisfied. Since the claim of deduction has not been examined by the AO, I restore the matter to the files of the AO to examine whether the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. It is ordered accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd July, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 3rd July, 2025 RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Coimbatore 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. "