Khadakala Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot)
Belated Return, Belated Appeal: Without Condonation Petition Proves Fatal-Tribunal Refuses to Condoned 300-Day Delay—80P Claim Dies at Threshold
Assessee filed appeal against CPC intimation u/s 143(1) disallowing deduction of ₹3,58,271/- u/s 80P on the ground that return was filed belatedly on 27.03.2019, much beyond due date of 31.08.2018. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on merits as well. Before Tribunal, notice of hearing was duly served, yet no appearance was made; no adjournment request was filed; and crucially, no petition for condonation of delay accompanied the appeal. Tribunal recorded that the appeal was delayed by 300 days, and Assessee consistently failed to explain any “sufficient cause”.
Revenue submitted that even before CIT(A) the Assessee had filed belated appeal without condonation request, and that deduction u/s 80P is barred by strict mandate of s.80AC post-amendment. Tribunal held that condonation is not a matter of right & burden to show sufficient cause lies entirely on the Assessee. Since no explanation or condonation petition was filed, Tribunal refused to condone the substantial delay. Appeal dismissed solely on limitation.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT RAJKOT
Captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], dated 20.10.2023, which in turn arises out of an intimation order passed by CPC, Bengaluru / Assessing Officer u/s 143(1) of the Act, on 25.06.2019.
