https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784483 The dominant issue was whether CPC could, in an intimation under s. 143(1)(a)(ii), deny a co-operative society's deduction under s. 80P solely because the return was filed beyond the due date under s. 139(1) for the relevant AY, notwithstanding that the specific adjustment in s. 143(1)(a)(v) was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Although co-ordinate ITAT benches had held that belated filing was not an "incorrect claim" within the Explanation to s. 143(1)(a)(ii), the Tribunal treated the binding Madras HC precedent as upholding such denial under s. 143(1)(a)(ii) in the absence of any contrary HC ruling, and sustained the adjustment; the appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jan 2026 12:21:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784483 The dominant issue was whether CPC could, in an intimation under s. 143(1)(a)(ii), deny a co-operative society's deduction under s. 80P solely because the return was filed beyond the due date under s. 139(1) for the relevant AY, notwithstanding that the specific adjustment in s. 143(1)(a)(v) was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Although co-ordinate ITAT benches had held that belated filing was not an "incorrect claim" within the Explanation to s. 143(1)(a)(ii), the Tribunal treated the binding Madras HC precedent as upholding such denial under s. 143(1)(a)(ii) in the absence of any contrary HC ruling, and sustained the adjustment; the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784483