M/s. Regional Oilseeds Growers Co-operative Societies Union Limited, Chitradurga V. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Davangere

MA 28/BANG/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0506 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP CHALAPATHY
• Keywords: Period of limitation
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. Nos. 28 & 29/Bang/2024 (in ITA Nos. 1354 & 1355/Bang/2016) Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. Regional Oilseeds Growers Co-operative Societies Union Ltd., Plot No. 74/A, KIADB Industrial Area, Kelagote, Chitradurga – 577 501. PAN: AACFR0370E Vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Davangere Range, Davangere. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CA Revenue by : Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 12-07-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 01-08-2024 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present miscellaneous petitions has been filed by the assessee seeking adjudication of ground no. 3 on merits in respect of allowability of deduction u/s. 80P of the act. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that at the time of argument the assessee had challenged the jurisdiction of the ACIT who passed the assessment order. This plea raised by the assessee was held Page 2 of 4 M.P. Nos. 28 & 29/Bang/2024 (in ITA Nos. 1354 & 1355/Bang/2016) against the assessee by this Tribunal placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Abhishar Builders. 2.1 The Ld.AR submitted that it is necessary to decide the issue on merit in order to render substantial justice to the assessee. 3. On perusal of the records, we note that the remand from the Hon’ble High Court was in respect to verify and examine the jurisdiction of the ACIT in passing the assessment order in the present case. This Tribunal after considering various sections and provisions of the act as well as the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Abhishar Builders held that any challenge regarding jurisdiction can be made only if the same has been raised within the period of limitation allowed u/s. 124(3) of the act. This Tribunal in the impugned order observed that, the assessee never challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order within time allowed u/s. 124(3) before the authorities below. Under such circumstances, the ratio of Hon’ble Supreme Court is squarely applicable to the present assessee and the legal issue was dismissed. 4. However inadvertently, the issue on merits of the case has not been considered, as rightly submitted by the assessee in the present miscellaneous petitions. Accordingly, the same is considered and held as under. Following paragraphs shall be read as para 4 and 4.1 after para 3.12 in the impugned order. “4. We note that the issue is regarding allowability of deduction u/s. 80P for both the Page 3 of 4 M.P. Nos. 28 & 29/Bang/2024 (in ITA Nos. 1354 & 1355/Bang/2016) years under consideration being A.Ys. 2012-13 and 2013-14. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue to the Ld.AO to verify the claim of assessee in accordance with the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT reported in 431 ITR 1 and Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. vs. AO reported in (2023) 154 taxmann.com 305. 4.1 We may also refer to various decisions of this Tribunal on similar issue which may be referred to and considered for deciding the issue. The assessee is directed to furnish all relevant documents / evidences in support of its claim which shall be verified by the Ld.AO in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee.” 5. No other part of the order by this Tribunal undergoes any change and has to be read as it is. In the result, both the miscellaneous petitions filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 01 st August, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 01 st August, 2024. /MS / Page 4 of 4 M.P. Nos. 28 & 29/Bang/2024 (in ITA Nos. 1354 & 1355/Bang/2016) Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A)-12 By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore