SHRI. GAJANAN URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,HUBBALLI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBBALLI

ITA 80/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Shri Gajanan Urban Co-op Credit Society Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that upheld the disallowance of a deduction claimed under section 80P of the Income Tax Act due to the late filing of the income tax return. The assessee had filed a return declaring nil income after claiming a deduction of Rs. 3,74,06,857 under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The return was not filed within the prescribed due date, leading to the disallowance of the deduction by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC), Bangalore. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed, prompting the appeal to the ITAT. The ITAT noted that the High Court had condoned the delay in filing the return and remitted the issue back to the JAO for fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398374 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GOKUL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 234B; 119(2)(b)

Judgement Text

"IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.80/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s. Shri Gajanan Urban Co-op Credit Society Ltd., Walvekar Galli, MG Market, Hubli, Hubli – 580 020. PAN :ABAAS 2465 H Vs. ITO, Ward – 2(1). Hubli. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Gokul, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 03.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This appeal filed by the assessee against the Order passed by the learned CIT(A) vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1051241330(1) dated 24.03.2023, on the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Order of the learned Commissioner passed under section 250 of the Act is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant’s case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have held that the CPC, Bangalore has erred in disallowing the deduction claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the act ITA No.80/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 4 Rs. 3,74,06,857/- on the ground thatreturn of income was not filed within the prescribed due date u/s 139(1) of the Act by way of an intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act by failing to appreciate that this was not permissible u/s 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have held CPC, Bangalore erred in disallowing the deduction u/s 80P of the Act of Rs.3,74,06,857/- onfiling of return of income beyond the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act by way of an intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act as the enabling provision Section 143(1)(a)(v)) was introduced by Finance Act, 2021 4. w.e.f1April2021andwasnotonthestatuteforimpugnedAY2019-20 5. The learned Commissioner of Income –tax ought to have appreciated that, on merits, the Appellant is eligible for deduction of Rs. 3,74,06,857/- claimed by the Appellant under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act in the return of incomefiled for the year 6. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon’ble Chief Commissioner ofIncome Tax/ Director General of Income Tax, the Appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act since it is not in accordance with the law as the rate, amount and the method of calculating interest is not discernible from the order of assessment. 7. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 8. In the view of the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of thehearing ofthe appeal,the Appellantprays that the appealmay be allowed in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that assessee is a Co-operative Society and is engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee filed return of income on 19.03.2020 declaring Nil income after claiming deduction of Rs.3,74,06,857/- under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Subsequently, assessee received communication from the CPC detailing the proposed adjustment. In the communication, it was proposed that “In schedule VI-A, under part C, deductions in repsect of certain income in Sl.No.2.m ITA No.80/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 4 deduction is claimed under section 80P however return is not filed within due date”. Accordingly, return was processed on 13.07.2020 under section 143(1 a) of the Act and deduction was not allowed. Resultantly, a sum of Rs.1,65,90,100/- was determined as tax payable. 3. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), aftr considering the submissions of the assessee, observed that the assessee has not filed ruturn of income under section 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, deduction under section 80P of the Act cannot be allowed to the assessee, and dismissed the appeal. In the mean time, assessee had filed application under section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the PCIT seeking condonation for delay in filing the return and the same was dismissed and the said action was challenged before the Hon’ble High Court in WP No.9864 of 2024. The learned Counsel submitted that he Hon’ble High Court has observed that the responsdent has hyper technical approach in not condoning the delay of 162 days without appreciating. The Hon’ble High Court has condoned the delay and allowed the WP of the assessee in which it has been observed as under: ITA No.80/Bang/2024 Page 4 of 4 4. On going through the above observation of the Hon’ble High Court, it is noticed that the Hon’ble High Court has condoned the delay in filing the return of income belatedly by 162 days. Since the claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act has not been examined by any of the lower authorities, therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we are remitting the issue back to the file of JAO for fresh consideration and decide the issue as per law and AO is further directed to given reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and assessee is directed to produce necessary documents for substantianting its claim of deduction and not to seek unnecessary adjournments for early disposal of the case. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/- Sd/- (SOUNDARARAJAN K) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated : 06.06.2025. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr.CIT4.CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore. "