SHRI OMKAR NAGARI SAH PAT SANSTHA,SANGLI V. ADDL. CIT (A), VARANASI

ITA 2957/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Omkar Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Ltd., a cooperative society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) that dismissed their appeal as barred by limitation. The original dispute arose from an Intimation Order by the CPC, Bengaluru, which denied a deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The assessee argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the COVID-19 pandemic and confusion over whether to file a rectification application under section 154 or an appeal. The ITAT found merit in the assessee's reasons for the delay, citing the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., and thus condoned the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832261 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHASHANK OJHA
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2957/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Omkar Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Ltd., Patrakar Nagar, Behind St. Stand, Sangli 416416, Maharashtra PAN : AABAS8331A Vs. ADIT, CPC Bengaluru Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2019-20 is directed against the order dated 31.10.2025 of Addl/JCIT(A), Varanasi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Intimation Order dated 28.05.2020 passed u/s.143(1) of the Act. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation and he has not condoned the delay in filing of the appeal which was mainly on account of covid-19 pandemic restrictions prevailed across the country. He referred to the cause of delay reproduced by ld.CIT(A) at pages 15 and 16 of the impugned order and only prayed for one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) as the only issue is regarding disallowance of deduction u/s.80P of the Act by the CPC in the return processed Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri Shashank Ojha Date of hearing : 12.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 19.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2957/PUN/2025 Shri Omkar Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Ltd. 2 u/s.143(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2019-10 inspite of the fact that such powers were conferred to the CPC w.e.f. 01.04.2021. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of ld.CIT(A). 4. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I note that the assessee is a Cooperative Society and return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 furnished on 31.08.2019 declaring Nil income after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act at ₹5,88,393. CPC vide order dated 28.05.2020 denied the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 18.04.2024, however, since there was delay in filing of the appeal before ld.CIT(A) and the reasons for delay were placed by the assessee. It was stated before ld.CIT(A) that firstly the delay was due to covid-19 pandemic restrictions from March 2020 to May 2022 and also that the assessee was trying to get rectification done u/s.154 of the Act but due to improper advice the assessee was confused as to whether he should file rectification application u/s.154 or to file appeal. In the process, delay occurred due to wrong professional advice as well. Considering the reasons which led to delay before ld.CIT(A) and also placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107) I find that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the time limit specified under the Act. I therefore condone the delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 5. Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits, I deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2957/PUN/2025 Shri Omkar Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Ltd. 3 that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced on this 19th day of January, 2026. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 19th January, 2026. Satish 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 // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "