9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 878 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - HELD THAT - We remit these issues to the Ld.AO to consider the claim of assessee in accordance with the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd 2021 (1) TMI 488 - SUPREME COURT and Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. 2023 (9) TMI 761 - SUPREME COURT . We also direct the Ld.AO to consider the decisions of this Tribunal wherein the claim in respect of interest on fixed deposits if any is not allowed u/s. 80P(2)(d) has to be considered in accordance with law by allowing the expenditure u/s. 57. Various decisions of this Tribunal may also be referred to for the sake of completeness of this issue. Appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues: Delay in filing appeals before CIT(A) and consideration of deduction claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act.
Delay in filing appeals before CIT(A): The present appeals arose from a consolidated order for A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2018-19 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-11, Bangalore. The appellant, through the Ld.AR, sought condonation of a 112-day delay in filing the appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). The reason for the delay was attributed to the advice of the erstwhile authorized representative to pay the demand without providing a redressal mechanism against the assessment order. The appellant later approached another tax consultant who advised filing the appeal, causing the delay. The Ld.DR did not contest that the delay was not attributable to the appellant. The Tribunal, after perusing the submissions and considering the absence of any malafide intention on the appellant's part, relied on the Supreme Court's observations in Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471, emphasizing the need for substantial justice and condoned the delay in filing the appeals. Consideration of deduction claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act: The appellant, in the second round of litigation, contended that the assessing officer dismissed the claim regarding deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) by relying on a specific Supreme Court decision, while the appellant's case differed from the facts considered in that decision. The Ld.DR supported the orders of the authorities below. The Tribunal noted that recent Supreme Court decisions in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT and Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. vs. AO were not considered by the authorities below. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remitted the issues back to the Ld.AO to reconsider the appellant's claim in light of the Supreme Court decisions and directed the consideration of interest on fixed deposits under section 80P(2)(d) in accordance with law, along with referencing various decisions of the Tribunal for completeness. The grounds raised by the appellant in both appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, resulting in the allowance of both appeals for statistical purposes. In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the delay issue by condoning it based on the absence of malafide intention and the need for substantial justice. Regarding the deduction claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i), the Tribunal remitted the issues to the Ld.AO for reconsideration in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, emphasizing the importance of following judicial precedents for a just outcome.
|
