Tribunal upheld that deductions under Section 80P cannot be disallowed in assessments processed under Section 143(1) prior to its amendment effective from April 2021.

आदेश/ORDER

Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

This appeal is filed by the Federation of AP Cooperative Urban Banks and Credit Societies Ltd, Hyd (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Addl/JCIT(A), Kochi, (“Ld. First Appellate Authority”) dated 31.03.2024 for the A.Y. 2019-20.

2. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 290 days in filing of the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for the same. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the assessee- society had filed its appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority on 03.03.2021 and had mentioned in Form No. 35 the e-mail address belonging to Shri K.S. Venkat Rao, a senior member of the society who was designated as Chief Executive Officer, for communication of notices. In the year 2024, after the retirement of Shri Venkat Rao, the society updated its official e-mail ID. However, in the interregnum, the Ld. First Appellate Authority passed the appellate order on 31.03.2024 and transmitted it to the earlier e-mail ID associated with Shri K.S. Venkat Rao. Since he had already left the society, the order did not reach the management of the assessee-society. After the retirement of Shri K.S. Venkat Rao, Shri Raghavendra Rao, the President of the society was looking after the tax matters of the society. The assessee came to know of the appellate order only on 30.12.2024, when it received a recovery communication from the Revenue authorities. It was explained that during the intervening period Shri Raghavendra Rao had been suffering from cardiac problems followed by spinal disorder, for which he was under medical treatment and temporarily incapacitated. After his recovery, he arranged to file the appeal without further delay. Medical records substantiating his condition have been placed on record. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. It was prayed that, in the interest of justice, the delay be condoned and the appeal admitted for adjudication on merits.

3. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) opposed the condonation, contending that there was an inordinate delay of 290 days, and that the assessee has not demonstrated sufficient cause for such prolonged inaction. The Ld. DR, therefore, prayed that the delay should not be condoned.

4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. The explanation tendered by the assessee-society is that the appellate order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority dated 31.03.2024 was sent to the earlier e- mail ID of Shri K.S. Venkat Rao, who had retired from the society, and thus the communication never reached the present management. The assessee became aware of the order only upon receipt of a recovery notice dated 30.12.2024 from Revenue. Thereafter, the President of the society, who had been under medical treatment for cardiac problems followed by spinal disorder, promptly arranged to file the present appeal. The supporting medical certificates and affidavit have been examined. In our considered view, the reasons stated constitute a reasonable and bona-fide cause for the delay. The explanation does not show any element of negligence or malafide intention. Further, we find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal vs. The Income Tax Officer , Ward-2, Ambikapu