2024 (5) TMI 220 - AT - Income Tax

Denying advance tax liability because of applicability of sec. 80P - Assessee s case that it is admittedly a cooperative society eligible for sec. 80P deduction and therefore, it could not have been held liable for payment of advance tax regarding an income which was not assessable under the provisions of the Act - HELD THAT - No merit in assessee s case denying it s advance tax liability because of applicability of sec. 80P of the Act. This is for the precise reason that such a deduction has to be claimed in a return going by sec. 80A(5) of the Act which has been held to be a mandatory condition as per EBR Enterprises vs. Union of India 2019 (6) TMI 484 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT . It is made clear that there is no material in the case file indicating the assessee to have raised the foregoing sec. 80P claim in a return in above terms. That being the case, find no merit in assessee s instant sole substantive grievance seeking to reverse NFAC s lower appellate findings dismissing it s appeal u/sec. 249(4)(b) of the Act. Ordered accordingly.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this judgment are (1) non-compliance with the requirements of S. 249(4)(b) regarding advance tax payment before filing an appeal, and (2) the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act.

Issue 1: Non-compliance with S. 249(4)(b) regarding advance tax payment:
The assessee appealed against the National Faceless Appeal Centre's decision not to admit the appeal due to alleged non-compliance with S. 249(4)(b) regarding advance tax payment. The assessee argued that as a cooperative credit society eligible for deduction u/s 80P, its entire income is eligible for deduction, hence no advance tax liability exists. The counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee should not be held liable for advance tax on income not assessable under the Act. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's argument, stating that the deduction u/s 80P must be claimed in a return as per sec. 80A(5) of the Act, which was not done by the assessee in this case. As there was no evidence of the assessee raising the sec. 80P claim in a return, the Tribunal upheld the NFAC's decision to dismiss the appeal u/s 249(4)(b) of the Act.

Issue 2: Disallowance of deduction u/s 80P:
The assessee also contested the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act. The learned DR disputed the assessee's deduction claim u/s 80P. After considering both sides, the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's argument to deny advance tax liability based on sec. 80P. The Tribunal emphasized that the sec. 80P deduction must be claimed in a return, which was not done by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal on this ground as well.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune upheld the decision of the National Faceless Appeal Centre regarding the non-admittance of the appeal due to non-compliance with advance tax payment requirements and the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P. The assessee's appeal was dismissed accordingly.