Kadalaikattupudur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Deduction u/s 80P Denied for Late Return – Matter Restored in View of Pending Condonation Petition
The Chennai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dealt with an appeal filed by a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society whose claim for deduction under section 80P was denied while processing the return under section 143(1) solely on the ground that the return was not filed within the due date prescribed under section 139(1).
The assessee had filed an updated return claiming deduction u/s 80P, explaining that the delay occurred due to belated completion of statutory audit by the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Department, which was beyond its control. Against the CPC intimation, the assessee’s appeal before the JCIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 52-day delay in filing the appeal.
The Tribunal first condoned the delay in filing the appeal, holding that sufficient cause was shown. It then noted that the assessee had already filed a condonation petition under section 119(2)(b) before the CCIT, Coimbatore, which was still pending. Since the only reason for denial of deduction u/s 80P was procedural delay, the Tribunal held that dismissing the appeal without awaiting the outcome of the statutory condonation petition was unjustified.
Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the appellate order and restored the matter to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, directing fresh adjudication of the deduction claim after considering the final decision of the CCIT on the condonation petition, and after granting due opportunity of hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.08.2025 passed by the Learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Pune (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. JCIT(A)”). The said order arises out of the intimation dated 13.08.2024 passed by the Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) u/s.143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), pertaining to the Assessment Year 2021-22.
2. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record, are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. The assessee filed an updated return of income on 15.02.2024 declaring total income of Rs.2,64,880/-after claiming deduction of Rs.16,84,793/- u/s.80P of the Act. While processing the return u/s. 143(1) of the Act, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) denied the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act on the ground that the return of income had not been furnished within the time prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by the said intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.JCIT(A). The first appellate authority, however, dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that there was a delay of 52 days in filing the appeal and that the assessee had not shown sufficient cause warranting condonation of delay. Being further aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before us.
4. We have considered the explanation tendered by the assessee with respect to the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal before the Ld.JCIT(A). On appreciation of the reasons placed on record, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause in not presenting the appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
5. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee, being a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, is statutorily required to undergo audit by the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Department. Owing to administrative delays at the level of the Co-operative Department, the audit for the relevant assessment year was completed belatedly. As a consequence, the assessee was unable to file the return of income within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act. It was further submitted that the assessee has already moved an application before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT), Coimbatore u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act, seeking condonation of delay in filing the return, and the said petition is presently pending. The Ld.AR prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for fresh adjudication in the light of the outcome of the condonation proceedings.
6. Per contra, the Ld.DR placed reliance upon the order of the Ld.JCIT(A) and fairly agreed for remit the matter back to the JAO to decide based on the outcome of the condonation petition filed by the assessee before the ld.CCIT.
7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is evident that the sole reason for denial of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act was the delay in filing the return. It is also an undisputed position that the assessee has already invoked the remedial jurisdiction of the ld.CCIT u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act and the decision thereon is awaited.
8. In our considered view, once a statutory petition seeking condonation of delay in filing the return is pending before the competent authority, the dismissal of the assessee’s appeal by the Ld.JCIT(A) without awaiting the outcome of such petition was neither justified nor conducive to proper adjudication of the matter. The claim of deduction u/s.80P of the Act goes to the root of the computation of taxable income, and denial of such claim merely on account of procedural delay when a condonation petition is pending would result in undue hardship to the assessee. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we consider it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The JAO shall re-adjudicate the assessee’s claim afresh, after duly taking into consideration the final order to be passed by the Ld.CCIT, Coimbatore on the assessee’s petition u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act dated 14.02.2025, and in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05th January, 2026 at Chennai.
