TNSPL 88 KEELAERAL PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO-OP SOCIETY,TUTICORIN V. ITO WARD 2, TUTICORIN

ITA 724/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. TNSPL 88 Keelaeral Primary Agriculture Co-Op Society, which appealed against the order of the Addl/JCIT (A)-6, Mumbai, concerning the denial of deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2023-24. The assessee had initially filed a delayed return and subsequently a delayed appeal to the FAA, which was dismissed in limine without merit consideration. The Tribunal found that the assessee's delay in filing the return and the subsequent appeal was not willful, as the assessee was under the bonafide belief that the delay in filing the return would affect the demand raised and was actively pursuing a remedy for condonation of delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398117 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRYATI SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: N. ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Bonafide belief; Competent authority
• Section: 119(2)(b)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘ए’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 724/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year:2023-24 M/s. TNSPL 88 Keelaeral Primary Agriculture Co-Op Society, Keelaeral Village, Keelaeral Post, Ettayapuram Taluk, Tuticorin – 628 908. PAN: AACAT 5739L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Tuticorin. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Pryati Sharma, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Addl/JCIT (A)-6, Mumbai dated 31.12.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2023-24. - 2 - ITA No.724/CHNY/2025 2. There is a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay. On perusal of the same, we find there is sufficient reason for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. The assessee is a primary agricultural co-operative society. It filed return of income for assessment year 2023-24 and claimed deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Since the return was filed beyond the period prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act, the CPC issued an intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act on 02.02.2024 denying the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (‘FAA’) with a delay of 200 days. The reasons stated by assessee for delay in filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority has been captured at pages 2 to 4 of the impugned order of the FAA. In the condonation application, it is stated that assessee had filed a petition before the Competent Authority for condoning the delay in filing the return of income and the same was pending. It was stated that the assessee society was under the bonafide belief that when assessee’s application for condonation of delay is pending consideration, the - 3 - ITA No.724/CHNY/2025 demand would not be raised. However, since the assessee was directed to pay the outstanding amount in the month of September, 2024, the assessee society was advised to file a statutory appeal and immediately an appeal was filed with a delay of 200 days. The FAA however was not convinced with the reasons stated for delay in filing the appeal before him. The FAA dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld.AR submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA was neither willful or deliberate since the assessee was pursuing a remedy to condone the delay in filing the return of income. It was submitted that if the Competent Authority has condoned the delay, necessarily the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act has to be considered on merits. It was submitted that since the condonation petition u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act before the competent authority has direct bearing, the matter may be restored to the files of the AO to await the decision of the Competent Authority on the condonation application filed in terms of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. 6. The Ld.DR supported the order of the FAA. - 4 - ITA No.724/CHNY/2025 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The FAA had dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating on merits by not condoning the delay of 200 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee had received the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act on 02.02.2024. The assessee had filed application u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act on 14.03.2024 for condonation of delay in filing the return of income. The assessee had approached the Competent Authority u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act within a reasonable period. The assessee’s application for condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act has a direct bearing as regards the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. In event the competent authority condones the delay in filing the return of income filed by the assessee necessarily the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act has to be considered on merits by the concerned AO. We are of the view that assessee was pursuing an alternative remedy (within a reasonable period) i.e., filing the condonation application u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act. Therefore, there is reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Hence, we condone the delay of 200 days in filing the appeal before the FAA. Since the assessee’s application of condonation of delay in filing the return of income is pending consideration before the Competent Authority, we deem it appropriate to restore the case to - 5 - ITA No.724/CHNY/2025 the files of the AO. The AO is directed to pass afresh order after the Competent Authority has passed the order regarding the assessee’s petition for condonation of delay in filing the return of income. It is ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 5th June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चेÛनई/Chennai, Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 5th June, 2025 RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Madurai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. "