MAHATMA PHULE GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATSANASTHA LTD,MAHARASHTRA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) , WARD ONE(ONE)

ITA 1989/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., a cooperative society, appealing against the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed the disallowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The disallowance was initially made by the Central Processing Centre (CPC) due to the late filing of the income tax return for the assessment year 2019-20. The Tribunal examined whether the CPC was authorized to make such a disallowance under section 80AC, considering the legal amendments and precedents cited by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778355 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Shiv Sahyadri Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit vs. ITA No.1788/PUN/2024, Lanjani Cooperative Agri Service Society Ltd. vs. DCIT (2023) 146 taxmann.com 468 (Chandigarh- Trib.)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH BIST

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1989/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. A/P. Hattiwade, Ajara, Kolhapur – 416505 Maharashtra PAN : AAAAM2608K Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Kolhapur Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20 is directed against the order dated 24.06.2025 of Addl/JCIT(A), Thiruvanantpuram passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Intimation Order dated 10.03.2021 passed u/s.143(1) of the Act. 2. When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, written submission dated 15.09.2025 is placed on record wherein the assessee has requested to decide the appeal on the basis of written submission. We therefore Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Harish Bist Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1989/PUN/2025 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. 2 proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of ld. DR and the available records. 3. The sole grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT(A) erred in applying the provisions of section 80AC of the Act thereby confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act made by the Central Processing Centre in the Intimation u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Cooperative Society and return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 has been furnished on 12.11.2020 after the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act, i.e. on 31.08.2019. The Central Processing Centre processed the return applying section 143(1)(a) of the Act and denied the claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on the ground that return has been filed after the prescribed due date u/s.139(1) of the Act and thus invoked the provisions of section 80AC(ii) of the Act. 6. We on going through the written submission filed by the assessee find that assessee has placed reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Shiv Sahyadri Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit in ITA No.1788/PUN/2024 order dated 07.11.2024 as well as the decision of Coordinate Bench, Chandigarh in the case of Lanjani Cooperative Agri Service Society Ltd. vs. DCIT (2023) 146 taxmann.com 468 (Chandigarh- Trib.). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1989/PUN/2025 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. 3 7. On perusal of these decisions of Coordinate Benches, it has been consistently held that prior to the Amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2021 amending sub-clause (v) of section143(1)(a) of the Act, CPC was not vested with the power for making the disallowance u/s.80AC of the Act denying the deduction u/s.80P of the Act on account of delay in furnishing the Income-tax return. The instant case pertains to A.Y. 2019-20 and the return has been processed by the CPC vide order dated 10.03.2021 which is prior to the date of amendment effective from 01.04.2021 brought in by the Finance Act, 2021. 8. Under these given facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that since CPC was not having powers to make the alleged prima-facie adjustment denying u/s.80P of the Act for the delay in filing the return of income as provided u/s.80AC of the Act, therefore, the alleged adjustment made by CPC is not justified and without jurisdiction. We accordingly reverse the finding of ld.CIT(A) and allow the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee directing the ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to allow the claim made by the assessee u/s.80P of the Act. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 10th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 10th October, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1989/PUN/2025 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. 4 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "