<?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 (3) TMI 1752 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469361</link>
    <description>A co-operative society&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 80P was not to be rejected merely because the return was filed late, where the delay had already been condoned under Section 119(2)(b). The only basis for disallowance was belated filing under Section 139(1); once the defect was regularised, and the assessee was otherwise eligible for the deduction, there was no remaining ground to refuse the claim. The note states that the disallowance was set aside and the deduction was allowed for both assessment years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 23:25:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907105" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1752 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469361</link>
      <description>A co-operative society&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 80P was not to be rejected merely because the return was filed late, where the delay had already been condoned under Section 119(2)(b). The only basis for disallowance was belated filing under Section 139(1); once the defect was regularised, and the assessee was otherwise eligible for the deduction, there was no remaining ground to refuse the claim. The note states that the disallowance was set aside and the deduction was allowed for both assessment years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>