<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (7) TMI 1224 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775156</link>
    <description>The ITAT Bangalore denied deduction u/s 80P to a cooperative society for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 due to belated filing of returns. Following precedents from Kerala HC and ITAT Bangalore, the tribunal held that post April 1, 2018, section 80P deductions are only allowable if claimed in returns filed within the due date prescribed u/s 139(1). Since the returns were filed after prescribed dates under sections 139(1), 139(4), 142(1), and 148, they were considered non-est and could not be acted upon by the Assessing Officer despite being filed before assessment completion. The tribunal emphasized that deduction provisions must be strictly construed against the assessee, and failure to meet statutory preconditions cannot be condoned. Regarding audit fees and interest expenses deductibility, the matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration due to lack of findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2025 08:43:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1224 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775156</link>
      <description>The ITAT Bangalore denied deduction u/s 80P to a cooperative society for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 due to belated filing of returns. Following precedents from Kerala HC and ITAT Bangalore, the tribunal held that post April 1, 2018, section 80P deductions are only allowable if claimed in returns filed within the due date prescribed u/s 139(1). Since the returns were filed after prescribed dates under sections 139(1), 139(4), 142(1), and 148, they were considered non-est and could not be acted upon by the Assessing Officer despite being filed before assessment completion. The tribunal emphasized that deduction provisions must be strictly construed against the assessee, and failure to meet statutory preconditions cannot be condoned. Regarding audit fees and interest expenses deductibility, the matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration due to lack of findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>