KADALAIKATTUPUDUR PACS,TIRUPPUR V. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPPUR

ITA 2596/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kadalaikattupudur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, which appealed against the order of the Learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Pune, which had dismissed their appeal due to a delay in filing. The primary issue was the denial of deduction under section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to the late filing of the income tax return. The assessee argued that the delay was caused by administrative issues within the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Department, which affected the timely completion of their mandatory audit. The Tribunal found that the dismissal of the appeal without awaiting the outcome of the condonation petition was not justified and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827420 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. ANITHA; C.I.T
• Assessee Lawyers: S.SENTHIL KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Competent authority; Co-operative Credit Society

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘सी’ \u000eयायपीठ, चे\u000eनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0015ी मनु क ुमार ग\u0019र, \u000eया\u001aयक सद य एवं \u0015ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद य क े सम# BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 2596/Chny/2025 \u001aनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kadalaikattupudur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Kadalaikattupudur Kaadaiyur, Kankeyam, Tiruppur. vs. ITO, Ward -1(4), Tiruppur. [PAN:AABAK-5741-N] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Respondent) अपीलाथ& क) ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. S. Senthil Kumar, Advocate '(यथ& क) ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. AnItha, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई क) तार ख/Date of Hearing : 19.11.2025 घोषणा क) तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.08.2025 passed by the Learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Pune (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. JCIT(A)”). The said order arises out of the intimation dated 13.08.2024 passed by the Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) u/s.143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), pertaining to the Assessment Year 2021-22. Printed from counselvise.com :-2-: ITA. No:2596 /Chny/2025 2. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record, are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. The assessee filed an updated return of income on 15.02.2024 declaring total income of Rs.2,64,880/- after claiming deduction of Rs.16,84,793/- u/s.80P of the Act. While processing the return u/s. 143(1) of the Act, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) denied the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act on the ground that the return of income had not been furnished within the time prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the said intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.JCIT(A). The first appellate authority, however, dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that there was a delay of 52 days in filing the appeal and that the assessee had not shown sufficient cause warranting condonation of delay. Being further aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before us. 4. We have considered the explanation tendered by the assessee with respect to the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal before the Ld.JCIT(A). On appreciation of the reasons placed on record, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause in not presenting the appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee, being a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, is statutorily required to undergo audit by the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Department. Owing to administrative delays at the level of the Co-operative Department, the audit for the relevant assessment year was completed belatedly. As a consequence, the assessee was unable to Printed from counselvise.com :-3-: ITA. No:2596 /Chny/2025 file the return of income within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. It was further submitted that the assessee has already moved an application before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act, seeking condonation of delay in filing the return, and the said petition is presently pending. The Ld.AR prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for fresh adjudication in the light of the outcome of the condonation proceedings. 6. Per contra, the Ld.DR placed reliance upon the order of the Ld.JCIT(A) and fairly agreed for remit the matter back to the JAO to decide based on the outcome of the condonation petition filed by the assessee before the ld.CCIT. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is evident that the sole reason for denial of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act was the delay in filing the return. It is also an undisputed position that the assessee has already invoked the remedial jurisdiction of the ld.CCIT u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act and the decision thereon is awaited. 8. In our considered view, once a statutory petition seeking condonation of delay in filing the return is pending before the competent authority, the dismissal of the assessee’s appeal by the Ld.JCIT(A) without awaiting the outcome of such petition was neither justified nor conducive to proper adjudication of the matter. The claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act goes to the root of the computation of taxable income, and denial of such claim merely on account of procedural delay when a condonation petition is pending would result in undue hardship to the assessee. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we consider it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The JAO shall re- adjudicate the assessee’s claim afresh, after duly taking into consideration the final order to be passed by the Ld.CCIT, Coimbatore on the assessee’s petition u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act dated 14.02.2025, and in accordance with law, after Printed from counselvise.com :-4-: ITA. No:2596 /Chny/2025 affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th January, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु क ुमार िग र) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) ाियक सद\u000f/Judicial Member (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद\u000f/Accountant Member चे\u000eनई/Chennai, -दनांक/Dated, the 05th January, 2026 SP आदेश क) '\u001aत/ल0प अ1े0षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ&/Appellant 2. '(यथ&/Respondent 3.आयकर आयु2त/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. 0वभागीय '\u001aत\u001aन ध/DR 5. गाड$ फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "