SHYAMGANJ PIRIJPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,WEST MIDNAPORE V. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 38, WEST MIDNAPUR

ITA 1961/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Society, which appealed against the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-5, Delhi. The appeal was related to the disallowance of a deduction claimed under section 80P of the Income Tax Act due to the late filing of the income tax return for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The CPC had disallowed the deduction citing non-compliance with the statutory deadline for filing the return. However, the Tribunal noted that the relevant amendment allowing such a disallowance was not in effect during the Assessment Year in question, leading to the decision in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474479 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Finolex Industries Ltd. Employees Co-o. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA No.76/PUN/2023
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MADHUMITA DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: SOUMITRA CHOUDHRY
• Section: 139(1); 80P

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES “SMC”, KOLKATA BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1961/KOL/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Vill & P.O. Shyamganj, Block-Daspur II, Dist-Paschim Medinipur-721153 West Bengal PAN : AALAS8075R V/s ACIT, Circle-38, Midnapur Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 2018- 19 at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 25.07.2024 passed by Addl./JCIT(A)-5, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of Intimation Order dated 04.07.2019 passed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Society carrying on the banking business. The assessee filed the return of income u/s.139(4) of the Act for the A.Y. 2018-19 on 18.03.2019 as against the due date for filing the return on 31.08.2018, Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhry, A.R. Revenue by : Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 27.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 05.02.2025 2 ITA No.1961/Kol/2024 Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., declaring Nil income after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act at Rs.5,46,053/-. The CPC vide its intimation dated 04.07.2019 made adjustment in the returned income for non-filing of the income-tax return u/s.139(1) of the Act, thereby disallowed the said claim made u/s.80P of the Act. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.Addl/JCIT(A) who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal but giving liberty to the assessee to prefer the alternate remedy available before the CCIT by observing as under : “The only effective ground in this appeal is regarding addition of Rs. 5,46,053/- on account of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act. It is brought on record that the due date of filing of the ITR in this case was 31.08.2018. However, the appellant filed its ITR on 18.03.2019 i.e. after the due date of filing of the ITR. Therefore, as the assessee violates the provisions of Section 80P of the Act, the CPC disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act. In this regard, it is reiterated that this appeal pertains to the denial of the deduction under section 80P of the Act due to the late filing of the Income Tax Return (ITR) for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appellant has argued that the delay in filing the ITR was due to ignorance and delay in statutory audit. Upon a thorough examination of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is noted that the cooperative society did indeed file the ITR beyond the prescribed due date. As per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, adherence to timelines is crucial for claiming deductions under various sections, including section 80P. The Act mandates strict compliance with the filing deadlines to ensure the timely processing and verification of returns. The Act provides clear guidelines that must be followed to ensure uniformity and predictability in tax administration. Notwithstanding the above, the appellant is advised to seek remedy by making an application before the concerned Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT) for the condonation of delay. This is in accordance with Instruction No. R11015/01/2023-CD-I dated 03.08.2023 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Cooperation, which provides for the consideration of such cases on merit. The Instruction allows taxpayers who have missed the filing deadline due to genuine reasons to apply for relief, thereby ensuring that the denial of deductions does not result in undue hardship. The CCIT is empowered to condone the delay if a satisfactory explanation is provided. In conclusion, while the appeal regarding the denial of the 80P deduction due to late filing is dismissed as per the statutory requirements of the Income Tax Act, the appellant is encouraged to pursue the available remedy through the application to the CCIT. This order is thus disposed of with the advice to the 3 ITA No.1961/Kol/2024 Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., appellant to take necessary steps in line with the guidance provided by the Ministry of Cooperation to potentially secure the desired deduction. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal assailing the impugned order. 5. I have heard the parties and perused the record placed before me. The solitary issue arises for my consideration is whether the CPC was justified in denying the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s.80P of the Act for filing the return belatedly. An amendment was brought in section 143(1)(a) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 giving powers to the CPC for disallowing the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act if return of income is not filed within the statutory time limit provided u/s.139(1) of the Act. However, prior to amendment, there was no mechanism for CPC to deny the deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Admittedly, the assessment year under consideration is 2018-19 whereas the amendment has been brought in from A.Y. 2021-22 and therefore the CPC erred in making the adjustment by way of disallowing deduction u/s.80 of the Act in the instant case. My view is fortified by the decision of Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Finolex Industries Ltd. Employees Co-o. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA No.76/PUN/2023, dated 03.04.2023 wherein the issue was decided in favour of the assessee by observing as under : “5. We have heard the submissions of the parties, considered the relevant materials/documents on record and analysed the facts and circumstances in this case. Section143(1)(a)(v) of the Act spells out that if any deduction is claimed under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A which include deduction u/s 80P such deduction has to be allowed only if the return is filed within due date specified under sub-section 139(1) of the Act. In other words, if any return is filed beyond due date u/s 139(1) of the Act then no deduction u/s 80P shall be allowed. However, clause (v) was inserted by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01- 4 ITA No.1961/Kol/2024 Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., 04-2021. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, is for F.Y. 2018- 19 relevant to A.Y. 2019-20 which is the period prior to amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2021. Before this amendment, clause (v) did not include and cover deduction u/s 80P. So therefore, in the present Case of the assessee though admittedly return was filed beyond the time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act but still section 143(1)(a)(v) is not applicable to the assessee since the case of the assessee is for A.Y. 2019-20, which is before the amendment. We also accept the argument of the ld. A.R for the assessee that even if the revenue intends to invoke clause (ii) of section 143(1)(a) that would also not be permissible since in the definition of incorrect claim as provided in the provision, the deduction u/s 80P is not included anywhere and is therefore, outside the purview of the said provision. Therefore, rigors of provisions of section 143(1)(a)(ii) and clause (v) are not applicable to the case of the assessee. On this legal ground itself, the assessee succeeds and any other grounds on merits, if any, becomes academic in nature.” 6. On perusal of the above, I find that the facts of the above case are identical to the instant case of assessee. Following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal (supra), I hold that CPC was not justified in disallowing the deduction claimed by assessee u/s.80P of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 as the powers for doing so were brought into the Act from A.Y. 2021-22. I therefore reverse the impugned order of the lower authorities and direct the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s.80P of the Act. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 05th day of February, 2025. - Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 05th February, 2025 Satish 5 ITA No.1961/Kol/2024 Shyamganj Pirijpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ\tेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant. 2. \b\tयथ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “(SMC)” ब\u0010च, Kolkata/ DR, ITAT, “(SMC)” Bench, Kolkata. 5. गाड\u0014 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata "