M/S. THE METROPOLITAN PREMISES CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 23(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3716/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. the Metropolitan Premises Co-op Society Ltd, which appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concerning an assessment year 2015-16. The primary issue was the disallowance of a deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, related to interest income from a cooperative bank, amounting to Rs. 7,10,201. The initial appeal was rejected by the CIT(A) due to a significant delay in filing (2522 days), without considering the merits of the case. The tribunal, while acknowledging the delay, decided to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination on merits, conditional upon the payment of a cost of Rs. 5,000 by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474432 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVIN SALUNKHE
• Assessee Lawyers: RUPAL SHAH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250; 143(1); 139(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H(SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3716/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/s. the Metropolitan Premises Co-op Society Ltd, C.26/27, Block-E, The Metropolitan Prem.Co-op. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 PAN: AAAAT8898E vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 23(2)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai- 400 012 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Mrs. Rupal Shah, CA Respondent by : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, SR DR Date of hearing : 22/01/2025 Date of pronouncement : 27/01/2025 O R D E R PER ANIKESH BANERJEE: Instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax / Addl / JCIT-2, Gauhati *for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’) passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’), date of order 27/05/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru (for brevity, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 143(1) of the Act, date of order 31/12/2015. 2 ITA No.3716 /Mum/2024 The Metropolitan Premises co-op Society Ltd 2. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a co-operative society and filed the return under section 139(1) of the Act. During the processing of return under section 143(1), the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income received from co-operative bank is duly disallowed to the tune of Rs.7,10,201/- and accordingly, the tax was determined at Rs.2,47,893/-. Being aggrieved on the order under section 143(1), the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 2522 days. During the hearing, the assessee submitted an affidavit and stated that the assessee had changed the Chartered Accountant and the new Chartered Accountant had no knowledge about the current demand. The Ld.AR further stated that on 03/12/2022, the newly appointed Chartered Accountant has filed a letter before the ITO, Ward 23(2)(1), Mumbai requesting for supplying the computation of demand and copy of assessment order for A.Y. 2015-16 related to the assessee. The copy of the letter was duly filed on 07/02/2022 before the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. After getting this order under section 143(1), the assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 2522 days. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) without considering the merit of the case, rejected the appeal on limitation and stated that the assessee had violated section 249(2) of the Act as the statutory limit was prescribed in the statute. 4. The Ld. AR submitted a prayer to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to allow the assessee a reasonable opportunity for hearing and redressal of grievances. Considering that the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with an inordinate delay of 2522days and the reasons provided for such delay are 3 ITA No.3716 /Mum/2024 The Metropolitan Premises co-op Society Ltd not entirely satisfactory, we are of the view that imposing a cost on the assessee is necessary to emphasize the importance of adhering to income tax proceedings. Accordingly, a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) is imposed on the assessee, which shall be paid to the credit of the Income Tax Department within two months from the date of receipt of this order. The payment of the aforementioned cost shall be verified by the Ld. CIT(A). Subject to the payment of the said cost, all issues are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits and for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. Both the parties have accepted the view taken by the Bench. We do not express any opinion on the merits of the case to ensure the appellate procedure before the Ld. CIT(A) remains uninfluenced. It is needless to state that the assessee shall be provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is expected to exercise due diligence during the appellate proceedings to facilitate the expeditious disposal of the appeal. 8 In the result, the appeal bearing ITA No.3716/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th day of January 2025. Sd/- sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,दिन ांक/Dated: 27/01/2025 Pavanan 4 ITA No.3716 /Mum/2024 The Metropolitan Premises co-op Society Ltd Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी/The Appellant , 2. प्रदिव िी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयुक्त CIT 4. दवभ गीयप्रदिदनदि, आय.अपी.अदि., मुबांई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. ग र्डफ इल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, Mumbai "