ITAT Remands Section 80P Deduction Dispute as Earlier Tribunal Ruling Was Not Considered

A Kondalampatty Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)

The Chennai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes and restored the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for fresh adjudication.

The assessee, A. Kondalampatty Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2018-19 on 11.10.2018 declaring total income at ‘Nil’. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the assessee’s claim for deduction under Sections 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee was not entitled to the deductions claimed and consequently disallowed them. As a result, an amount of ₹19,37,852/- was brought to tax under the head “Income from Other Sources,” and the total income was determined accordingly.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), seeking deletion of the addition and allowance of the deductions claimed under Sections 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(d) of the Act.

The CIT(A), by order dated 20.01.2026, dismissed the appeal primarily on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish relevant documentary evidence in support of its claim. Accordingly, the additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were confirmed.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the CIT(A) had passed the order without properly appreciating the facts and materials available on record. It was further submitted that the CIT(A) failed to consider the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA No.1016/Chny/2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18, dated 24.07.2024, where similar issues had been adjudicated.

According to the assessee, had the earlier Tribunal decision been taken into account, the outcome of the appeal could have been materially different. The assessee, therefore, requested that the matter be remanded for fresh consideration in light of the earlier order passed in its own case.

The Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee had failed to substantiate its claim with the necessary evidence. It was, therefore, argued that the order of the CIT(A) should be sustained.

After considering the rival submissions and examining the material on record, the Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal mainly due to the absence of supporting documents and had not examined the assessee’s claim in the light of the Co-ordinate Bench decision rendered in the assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2017-18.

The Tribunal noted that the earlier decision pertained to the same assessee and involved similar issues. Therefore, the said decision deserved due consideration while deciding the present appeal.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, the Tribunal held that the assessee should be granted one final opportunity to substantiate its claim before the appellate authority.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law. The CIT(A) was directed to specifically consider the Tribunal’s earlier decision in the assessee’s own case and pass a speaking order after examining the evidence and submissions that may be furnished by the assessee.

The Tribunal further directed the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Simultaneously, the assessee was directed to diligently pursue the appeal and extend full cooperation by furnishing all necessary details and supporting documents during the appellate proceedings.

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI

The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 21.01.2026 for Assessment Years 2018-19.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant, A. Kondalampatty Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 11.10.2018 declaring total income at ‘Nil’.

During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the claim of deduction made by the assessee under sections 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee was not entitled to the deductions claimed and consequently disallowed the same. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.19,37,852/- was brought to tax under the head “Income from Other Sources” and the total income was determined accordingly.

3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) seeking deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer and allowance of deduction claimed under sections 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(d) of the Act.

The ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 20.01.2026, dismissed the appeal primarily on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish the relevant documentary evidence in support of its claim. Consequently, the additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were confirmed.

Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal.

4. The ld. Authorised Representative (AR) for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order without properly appreciating the facts and materials available on record. It was further contended that the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider and follow the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA No.1016/Chny/2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18 dated 24.07.2024, wherein similar issues had been adjudicated.

The ld. AR submitted that had the said decision been duly considered, the outcome of the appeal could have been materially different. Accordingly, it was prayed that the matter may be restored for fresh consideration in the light of the aforesaid Tribunal order.

5. Per contra, the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee had failed to substantiate its claim with necessary evidence. He, therefore, prayed that the order of the ld. CIT(A) be sustained.

6. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below as well as the material placed on record.

It is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal mainly for want of supporting documents and did not examine the claim of the assessee in the light of the decision rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA No.1016/Chny/2024 dated 24.07.2024 for Assessment Year 2017­18. Since the said decision pertains to the same assessee and involves similar issues, the same deserves due consideration while adjudicating the present appeal.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be afforded one final opportunity to substantiate its claim before the appellate authority.

Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law. While doing so, the ld. CIT(A) shall specifically consider the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.1016/Chny/2024 dated 24.07.2024 for Assessment Year 2017- 18 in the assessee’s own case and pass a speaking order after examining the evidences and submissions that may be furnished by the assessee.

The ld. CIT(A) shall afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to diligently prosecute the appeal and extend full cooperation during the appellate proceedings by furnishing all necessary details and supporting documents.

7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 01^st day of June, 2026, in Chennai.