" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.875/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) The Bhagirathi Cooperative Milk Producers Union Limited Feeder Dairy, NH-34, Berhampore, Dist: Murshidabad-742101 Vs ITO Ward-56(3), Murshidabad PAN No. :AAABT 0159 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 25.02.2025 of the ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Mumbai, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073693319(1) for the assessment year 2021-2022. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Abhijit Adhikary, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. On perusal of the statement of facts filed before the ld. CIT(A), we find that the assessee has been denied the benefit of deduction u/s.80P(2) of the Act on the ground that the Form 10CCB is not filed within the due date or the extended due date for the A.Y.2021-2022. It was the submission that the same has been filed along with the return. It was also the submission that no show cause notice was issued to the assessee. The ITA No.875/Kol/2025 2 assessee has specifically raised this issue in the statement of facts before the ld.CIT(A). It was the submission that the adjustment which to be made is in an adjustment made u/s.143(1) of the Act, insofar as the same did not fall within the criteria of arithmetical error in the return or an incorrect claim which is apparent from any information in the return. 4. Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the intimation has been issued by the CPC. He vehemently supported the order of the of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). 5. We have considered the submissions of the ld. Sr.DR. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the denial of exemption u/s.80P(2) of the Act is not something which can be done in an intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act, insofar as it does not fall within any of the criterion or the conditions prescribed in the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. As the denial of the exemption u/s.80P(2) of the Act has been made for the reasons beyond the criterion mentioned in the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act, we are of the view that the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act would fail and consequently the said intimation stands quashed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25/06/2025. Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 25/06/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. ITA No.875/Kol/2025 3 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// "