आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. No. 119/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No.612/Chny/2023] Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manikampalayam Primary Agricultural Co-op. Credit Society Limited, Manikampalayam, Kurichi, Bhavani (TK), Erode 638 314. [PAN:AACAM0033C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Erode. (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 08.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the assessee seeks to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 612/Chny/2023 dated 26.06.2023 relevant to the assessment year 2018-19. 2. By referring to the petition, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the amendment to section 80AC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] shall not be applicable in assessee’s case as the M.P. No.119/Chny/23 2 deduction under section 80P of the Act has been claimed for the assessment year 2018-19. Thus, it was prayed that order of the Tribunal may be recalled and decide the issue afresh. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that there is no mistake apparent in the order of the Tribunal. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the order passed by the Tribunal dated 26.06.2023. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Tribunal has observed and held as under: 5. We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, since the return of income for the assessment year was not filed within the due date of filing as specified under section 139(1) of the Act, the CPC, Bengaluru disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee has submitted that it has filed condonation application before the CBDT and requested the ld. CIT(A) to grant adjournment till the outcome of the application. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 6. Before the Tribunal, it was the submission made by the assessee along with Form 36 that appointment of statutory auditor and getting the audit report before the due date of filing of return of income was beyond the control of the assessee. Since the Department of Co-operative Audit conducted the statutory audit and served the tax audit report after the due date of filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the assessee filed the return of income under section 139(4) of the Act. On perusal of the appellate order, we find that before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has submitted that it has submitted an application before the CBDT for condonation of delay and has requested for adjournment till the outcome of the application of the assessee. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and directed the assessee to claim the deduction under section 80P of the Act as and when it received the communication from the CBDT. 6.1 In view of the fact that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay before the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, we are of the considered opinion that pending decision of the CBDT on the delay condonation application of the assessee, the Department ought to have waited for the decision of the CBDT, for the reason that, if the CBDT condone the delay, the claim of the assessee has to be considered in accordance with law. Therefore, we set aside the M.P. No.119/Chny/23 3 order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to wait for the decision on the condonation petition filed by the assessee before the CBDT and thereafter pass order in accordance with law. On perusal of the above decision of the Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal has rightly decided the matter on merits after considering the materials available on record. Thus, we find no mistake apparent in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee is dismissed. 5. In the result, the MP filed by the petitioner is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08 th September, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA, G.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 08.09.2023 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.