THE SIMPSON & GROUP COMPANIES COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-10(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2784/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves The Simpson & Group Companies Cooperative Credit Society Limited, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeals were related to the disallowance of deductions claimed under section 80P(2)(f) for AY 2018-19 and section 80P(2)(i) for AY 2020-21. The primary contention was the rejection of the condonation of delay in filing the appeals, which the Tribunal found to be reasonable and thus directed the lower authority to reconsider the deductions claimed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 825017 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LATCHANA
• Assessee Lawyers: KIRAN DHANATEJA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं सुŵी एस.पȧावती,, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Ms. S. Padmavathy, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2783 & 2784/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 The Simpson & Group Companies Cooperative Credit Society Limited, No. 1, Desi Colony, 3rd Street, Perambur High Road, Perambur, Chennai 600 012. [PAN: AAHAT1327R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Kiran Dhana Teja, CA ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Latchana, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate orders both dated 24.06.2025 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2020-21. 2. Since issues raised in both the appeals are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2783 & 2784/Chny/25 2 hear the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up ITA No. 2783/Chny/2025 – AY 2018-19 for adjudication. 4. We find that the appeal is filed with a delay of 39 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. We note that the return filed by the assessee was processed by CPC under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] at a total income of ₹.85,39,020/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny to verify deduction from total income under Chapter VI-A. In response to the notice issued by the Assessing Officer, the reply furnished by the assessee are reproduced under para 7 of the impugned order. Vide notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 19.01.2021, the assessee was asked to provide nature and source of interest income of ₹.12,09,46,190/- and miscellaneous income of ₹.24,35,863/-, which were shown in the ITR for AY 2018-19. Since the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2783 & 2784/Chny/25 3 assessee could not furnish any response to the said notice, by disallowing the deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(f) of the Act at ₹.78,69,616/-, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act dated 13.04.2021 by accepting the returned income of the assessee. Against the disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(f) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by rejecting the condonation of delay. 6. The ld. AR Shri Kiran Dhana Teja, C.A. submits that at para 5.5 of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) observed that there is delay of 385 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. He argued that actually, there is only 4 days delay in filing the appeal and rest of the days are saved by the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Petition No.21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 dated 10.01.2021. He submits that the delay in filing the appeal is neither wilful nor wanton, but, beyond the control of the assessee. The ld. AR prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) may be condoned and prayed one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2783 & 2784/Chny/25 4 7. The ld. DR Ms. Latchana, JCIT fairly conceded that the matter may be remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and for adjudication of the issue raised in the appeal. 8. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We note that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. On perusal of the appellate order, the ld. CIT(A) observed that there is a delay of 385 days in filing the appeal and accordingly dismissed. We note that there is only 4 days delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and rest of the days are saved by the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Petition No.21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 (supra). Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) is directed to condone the delay considering the delay condonation petition and adjudicate the issue of deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(f) of the Act on merits after considering the submissions/ material evidence as may be furnished by the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to furnish documentary evidence/explanations before the ld. CIT(A) to substantiate the claim of the deduction under section 80P(2)(f) of the Act. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2783 & 2784/Chny/25 5 ITA No. 2784/Chny/2025 – AY 2020-21 9. We find that the appeal is filed with a delay of 39 days. The assessee filed affidavits for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 10. We note that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 22.09.2022 by disallowing the deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(i) of the Act at ₹.55,34,339/- for the assessment year under consideration. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal since there is no reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. 11. The ld. AR submits that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by rejecting the condonation for the delay of 180 days in filing the appeal. By reiterating the submissions as made before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. AR prayed to condone the delay. The ld. AR further submits that similar claim of the assessee of deduction under section 80P(2)(f) of the Act for AY 2018-19 is yet to be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A) and thus, prayed to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the same for the AY under consideration. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2783 & 2784/Chny/25 6 12. Having heard both the parties, we note that the reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal furnished by the assessee is reproduced at para 2 of the impugned order. Upon perusal of the same we note that there is reasonable cause for the delay and direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits with regard to the claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(i) of the Act for AY under consideration. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 13. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31st December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S. PADMAVATHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 31.12.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "