KANAYANNUR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,ERNAKULAM V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD 1(3) , KOCHI

ITA 660/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Kanayannur Service Co-operative Bank Limited, which appealed against the orders of the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding the denial of deduction under section 80P(2) for the assessment years 2017-2018 and 2011-2012. The primary issue was the non-filing of the income tax return within the prescribed time, which led to the denial of the deduction claim. The Tribunal referenced the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in a similar case, affirming that the assessee's failure to file the return on time disqualified them from claiming the deduction under section 80P.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361079 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham v. CIT (2023) 459 ITR 730 (Ker.)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VENI RAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: AMALJIT P.J.
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.659/Coch/2024 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 ITA No.660/Coch/2024 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 Kanayannur Service Co- operative Bank Limited Chottanikara Ernakulam – 682 312. PAN : AABAK4920B. v. The Income Tax Officer Non Corp Ward 1(1) Kochi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Amaljit P.J., CA Respondent by : Smt.Veni Raj, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.05.2025. Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2025 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : These two appeals filed by the assessee are arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 27.05.2024, and relate to the assessment years 2017-2018 and 2011-2012. 2. Since facts are common, we are deciding these appeals by way of this consolidated order, for the sake of convenience. We will take assessment year 2017-2018 as a lead year and discuss the facts. ITA Nos.659-660/Coch/2024. Kanayannur SCB Limited. 2 3. The brief facts as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a co-operative society could not file the return of income for the impugned year. Thereafter the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.142(1) of the Act calling for the return of income. No compliance was made by the assessee in this notice. Thereafter the AO issued another notice on 15th October, 2019 calling for the details from the assessee, however, this notice also remained uncomplied with. At last an order of assessment was passed on 12.12.2019 determining an income of the assessee at Rs.1,30,40,812. This order was reviewed by the ld.CIT u/s.263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and ultimately set aside on 08th March, 2022. Thereafter the AO passed the impugned assessment order and denied the deduction of sec.80P(2) of the Act to the tune of Rs.2.21 crore on the ground that since no return of income was filed the claim of the assessee is not maintainable in view of the provisions of sec.80AC of the Act. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A), however, could not get any success. 5. Aggrieved with the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. When this matter was called up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee argued that the CIT(A) has erred in denying deduction of 80P of the Act. 6. The learned CIT-DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below as well as on ITA Nos.659-660/Coch/2024. Kanayannur SCB Limited. 3 the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham v. CIT (2023) 459 ITR 730 (Ker.). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We observe that admittedly the facts of the case would show that the assessee has not filed any return of income within the time prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act, and therefore, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not entitle for deduction u/s.80P of the Act, in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham (supra). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) is justified in affirming the order of the AO, and accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 8. Our observations in this order is applicable mutatis mutandis to the other appeal in ITA No.660/Coch/2024 for assessment year 2011-2012, as well. 9. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on this 20th day of May, 2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 20th May, 2025. Devadas G* ITA Nos.659-660/Coch/2024. Kanayannur SCB Limited. 4 Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "