MAHARASHTRIYA AIKYAVARDHAK PARASPAR SAHAKARI MANDAL PATPEDHI LTD.,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 14(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1668/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issues were the rejection of the appeal by the CIT(A) due to alleged delay and the disallowance of a deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had initially rejected the appeal on the grounds that it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit without a condonation application. However, the Tribunal found that the appeal was filed within the extended deadline due to the pandemic-related circular issued by the CBDT, which extended the time for filing appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712680 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVIN SALUNKHE
• Assessee Lawyers: KUMAR KALE
• Keywords: Set aside; Revised return; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 148; 143(3); 139

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H (SMC)” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd., A Wing, 1st floor, Pranay Sudarshan, Joshi Lane, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai-400077. Vs. ITO Ward 14(2)(1), Room No. 457, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AABAM 5906 H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Kumar Kale, Adv. Revenue by : Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 30/07/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2018-19, raising following grounds: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the appellant's appeal filed on Printed from counselvise.com 27.05.2021 on the ground that the said appeal was not filed within the prescribed time as provided in section 249(2) of the Act. The appellant submits that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that time limit to file the said appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021 vide CBDT's Circular No.8 of 2021 and hence, there was no delay in filing of appeal. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the appeal be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adju 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellant submits that disallowance of its claim for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act is unjustified. The appellant, therefore, prays that deduction u/s. 80P be 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this appeal has been filed with a delay of 38 days. that the person authorized to file appeal and was away from head quarter due to ill healt appeal on time. In view of reasons explained, we found that there was a sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal and accordingly delay of 38 days in filing this appeal admitted for adjudication. 3. We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant materials on record. impugned order, declined to admit the assessee’s appeal on the ground that the same had been filed with a delay of approximately 32 days, without any accompanying application seeking condonation thereof. The relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) are as under: “2. On perusal of form 35, it is seen that the appeal has been filed on 27.05.2021. However the order u/s 143(3) of the Act has been passed on 22.03.2021 and the appellant itself in form 35 Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 27.05.2021 on the ground that the said appeal was not filed within the prescribed time as provided in section 249(2) of the Act. The appellant submits that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that time limit to file the said appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021 vide CBDT's Circular No.8 of 2021 and hence, there was no delay in filing of appeal. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the appeal be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on its merits. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellant submits that disallowance of its claim for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act is unjustified. The appellant, therefore, prays that deduction u/s. 80P be allowed to it. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this appeal has been filed with a delay of 38 days. that the person authorized to file appeal was being senior citizen head quarter due to ill health, could not file the In view of reasons explained, we found that there was a sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal and accordingly delay of 38 days in filing this appeal was condoned and appeal was admitted for adjudication. We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant materials on record. The learned CIT(A), in the impugned order, declined to admit the assessee’s appeal on the ground that the same had been filed with a delay of approximately , without any accompanying application seeking condonation thereof. The relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) 2. On perusal of form 35, it is seen that the appeal has been filed on 27.05.2021. However the order u/s 143(3) of the Act has been passed on 22.03.2021 and the appellant itself in form 35 Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. 2 ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 27.05.2021 on the ground that the said appeal was not filed within the prescribed time as provided in section 249(2) of the Act. The appellant submits that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the time limit to file the said appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021 vide CBDT's Circular No.8 of 2021 and hence, there was no delay in filing of appeal. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the appeal be dication on its merits. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellant submits that disallowance of its claim for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act is unjustified. The appellant, therefore, prays that At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this appeal has been filed with a delay of 38 days. He submitted being senior citizen h, could not file the In view of reasons explained, we found that there was a sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal and accordingly condoned and appeal was We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused The learned CIT(A), in the impugned order, declined to admit the assessee’s appeal on the ground that the same had been filed with a delay of approximately , without any accompanying application seeking condonation thereof. The relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) 2. On perusal of form 35, it is seen that the appeal has been filed on 27.05.2021. However the order u/s 143(3) of the Act has been passed on 22.03.2021 and the appellant itself in form 35 Printed from counselvise.com has mentioned that order was received on 22.03.2021 itself. The appellant was required to file appeal within 30 days as provided vide section 249(2) on receipt of order u/s 143(3). However, the appellant has filed appeal after 30 days of the receipt of order. Therefore, it is clear that there is delay in filing of a appellant’s part. 3. Further, it is also noticed that the appellant in form 35 has mentioned that there is no delay in filing of appeal which is not true as vide facts discussed in para 2, it is clear that there is delay in filing of appeal on in filing of appeal and the appellant has not given any reason for delay nor requested to condonation of the same, therefore, I am not satisfied that the appellate had sufficient cause for not presenting the appea appeal was not filed within prescribed time as provided in the section 249(2) of the IT Act, the same is not admitted. 3.1 Before us, however, learned counsel for the assessee has brought to our attention C 225/49/2021/ITA-II], dated 30.04.2021, issued in exercise of powers under Section 119 of the Act. The said circular, issued in light of the prevailing pandemic situation, inter alia, extended the time limit for filing app the Act. The clause (a) of the Circular specifically provides that where the last date for filing an appeal under the relevant provisions falls on or after 1st April 2021, such appeal may be filed either within the time prescribed under the Act or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later. under: CIRCULAR NO. 8 OF 2021 [F. NO.225/49/2021/1T A Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 has mentioned that order was received on 22.03.2021 itself. The appellant was required to file appeal within 30 days as provided vide section 249(2) on receipt of order u/s 143(3). However, the appellant has filed appeal after 30 days of the receipt of order. Therefore, it is clear that there is delay in filing of a appellant’s part. 3. Further, it is also noticed that the appellant in form 35 has mentioned that there is no delay in filing of appeal which is not true as vide facts discussed in para 2, it is clear that there is delay in filing of appeal on appellant’s part. Since there is delay in filing of appeal and the appellant has not given any reason for delay nor requested to condonation of the same, therefore, I am not satisfied that the appellate had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the specified period. Hence, since, appeal was not filed within prescribed time as provided in the section 249(2) of the IT Act, the same is not admitted.” Before us, however, learned counsel for the assessee has brought to our attention CBDT Circular No. 8 of 2021 [F. No. II], dated 30.04.2021, issued in exercise of powers under Section 119 of the Act. The said circular, issued in light of the prevailing pandemic situation, inter alia, extended the time limit for filing appeals before the CIT(A) under Chapter XX of the Act. The clause (a) of the Circular specifically provides that where the last date for filing an appeal under the relevant provisions falls on or after 1st April 2021, such appeal may be filed e time prescribed under the Act or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later. The relevant circular is reproduced as CIRCULAR NO. 8 OF 2021 [F. NO.225/49/2021/1T A-II], DATED 30 Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. 3 ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 has mentioned that order was received on 22.03.2021 itself. The appellant was required to file appeal within 30 days as provided vide section 249(2) on receipt of order u/s 143(3). However, the appellant has filed appeal after 30 days of the receipt of order. Therefore, it is clear that there is delay in filing of appeal on 3. Further, it is also noticed that the appellant in form 35 has mentioned that there is no delay in filing of appeal which is not true as vide facts discussed in para 2, it is clear that there is appellant’s part. Since there is delay in filing of appeal and the appellant has not given any reason for delay nor requested to condonation of the same, therefore, I am not satisfied that the appellate had sufficient cause for not l within the specified period. Hence, since, appeal was not filed within prescribed time as provided in the ” Before us, however, learned counsel for the assessee has BDT Circular No. 8 of 2021 [F. No. II], dated 30.04.2021, issued in exercise of powers under Section 119 of the Act. The said circular, issued in light of the prevailing pandemic situation, inter alia, extended the eals before the CIT(A) under Chapter XX of the Act. The clause (a) of the Circular specifically provides that where the last date for filing an appeal under the relevant provisions falls on or after 1st April 2021, such appeal may be filed e time prescribed under the Act or by 31st May The relevant circular is reproduced as II], DATED 30-4-2021 Printed from counselvise.com In view of severe pandemic, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exe under section 119 of the Income Income-tax compliances by the taxpayers: (a) Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) under Chapter XX of the Income 1961 for which the last d thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that Section or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; (b) Objections to Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing under that Section is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that Section or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; (c) Income-tax return in response to notice under section Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing of return of income under the said notice is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time allowed under that notice or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; (d) Filing of belated return under sub section (5) of Section 139 of the Income 2020-21, which was required to be filed on or before 31st March 2021, may be filed on or before 31st May 2021; (e) Payment of tax deducted under section 194 194M of the Income tax deducted, which are required to be paid and furnished by 30th April 2021 under Rule 30 of the Incom or before 31st May 2021; (f) Statement in Form No. 61, containing particulars of declarations received in Form No. 60, which is due to be furnished on or before 30th April 2021, may be furnished on or 3.2 In the present case, the assessment order under Section 143(3) was admittedly served on 22.03.2021. Accordingly, the due date for filing the appeal under normal circumstances was 21.04.2021. However, in view of the relaxation gra above-referred circular, the time for filing the appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021. The assessee filed the appeal on 27.05.2021, which is clearly within the extended limitation period as per the CBDT circular. Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 In view of severe pandemic, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exe under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, provides following relaxation in respect of tax compliances by the taxpayers: Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) under Chapter XX of the Income 1961 for which the last date of filing under that Section is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that Section or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; Objections to Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under section 144C of the Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing under that Section is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that Section or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; tax return in response to notice under section 148 of the Income Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing of return of income under the said notice is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time allowed under that notice or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; elated return under sub-section (4) and revised return under sub section (5) of Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 21, which was required to be filed on or before 31st March 2021, may be filed on or before 31st May 2021; Payment of tax deducted under section 194-IA, Section 194 194M of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and filing of challan-cum tax deducted, which are required to be paid and furnished by 30th April 2021 under Rule 30 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, may be paid and furnished on or before 31st May 2021; Statement in Form No. 61, containing particulars of declarations received in Form No. 60, which is due to be furnished on or before 30th April 2021, may be furnished on or before 31st May 2021. In the present case, the assessment order under Section 143(3) was admittedly served on 22.03.2021. Accordingly, the due date for filing the appeal under normal circumstances was 21.04.2021. However, in view of the relaxation gra referred circular, the time for filing the appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021. The assessee filed the appeal on 27.05.2021, which is clearly within the extended limitation period as per the Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. 4 ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 In view of severe pandemic, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exercise of its powers tax Act, 1961, provides following relaxation in respect of Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) under Chapter XX of the Income-tax Act, ate of filing under that Section is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that Section or by 31st Objections to Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) under section 144C of the Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing under that Section is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time provided under that 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for which the last date of filing of return of income under the said notice is 1st April 2021 or thereafter, may be filed within the time allowed under that notice or by 31st May 2021, whichever is later; section (4) and revised return under sub- tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 21, which was required to be filed on or before 31st March 2021, may IA, Section 194-IB and Section cum-statement for such tax deducted, which are required to be paid and furnished by 30th April 2021 tax Rules, 1962, may be paid and furnished on Statement in Form No. 61, containing particulars of declarations received in Form No. 60, which is due to be furnished on or before 30th April 2021, may In the present case, the assessment order under Section 143(3) was admittedly served on 22.03.2021. Accordingly, the due date for filing the appeal under normal circumstances was 21.04.2021. However, in view of the relaxation granted by the referred circular, the time for filing the appeal stood extended up to 31.05.2021. The assessee filed the appeal on 27.05.2021, which is clearly within the extended limitation period as per the Printed from counselvise.com 3.3 In light of the foregoin ground of limitation by the learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. The impugned order, to the extent it declines to admit the appeal on the basis of delay, is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to the file of the learned CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal as having been filed within limitation and to adjudicate the same on merits in accordance with law. is accordingly allowed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assess statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30/07/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 In light of the foregoing, the rejection of the appeal on the ground of limitation by the learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. The impugned order, to the extent it declines to admit the appeal on the basis of delay, is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to learned CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal as having been filed within limitation and to adjudicate the same on merits in accordance with law. The ground of appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for nounced in the open Court on 30/07/2025. - Sd/ (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Maharashtriya Aikyavardhak Paraspar Sahakari Mandal Patpedhi Ltd. 5 ITA No. 1668/MUM/2025 g, the rejection of the appeal on the ground of limitation by the learned CIT(A) is unsustainable. The impugned order, to the extent it declines to admit the appeal on the basis of delay, is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to learned CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal as having been filed within limitation and to adjudicate the same on The ground of appeal of the assessee ee is allowed for /07/2025. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "