9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 574X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61 (`the Act' hereinafter) vide separate orders dated 24.01.2022 for assessment years (AYs.) 2012-2013 and 2017-2018, vide, again, separate orders of even date, i.e., 18.11.2022. The facts and circumstances of both the appeals being largely common, the same were posted for hearing together and, accordingly, heard together. 2. The background facts of the case are that assessments for both the years were made denying the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act following the decision by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT v. Poonjar Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. [2019] 414 ITR 67 (Ker)(FB), relying, among others, on the decision in The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2017] 397 ITR 1 (SC). It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first appeal, the assessee is in second appeal before us. 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 The assessee's case before us for both the years was that the audit report had been received from the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kerala, over which it had no control, much after the specified date, i.e., on 18.7.2013 and 18.12.2017, for AY 2012-2013 and 2017-2018, respectively, and which therefore prevented it from furnishing the same by the specified date u/s.44AB. True, the said report is also, by virtue of third proviso to sec.44AB, required to be furnished, i.e., apart from the audit report in the specified form (Form 3CA and Form 3CD) where, as in the instant case, the accounts of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h as we have, for the reasons stated above, found the assessee's explanation not tenable, we do not insist on it furnishing material to bear out its case. Infact, a similar plea, i.e., the delayed receipt of audit report under the Kerala Act, was found not acceptable by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Peroorkkada SCB Ltd. v. ITO [2020] 114 taxmann.com 18 (Ker), to which reference has been made by the Co-ordinate Bench in Kundayam SCB Ltd. v. ITO (ITA No.951/Coch/2022, dated 28.04.2023). The Hon'ble High Court found little merit in pleading compliance of s. 4AB on furnishing only the tax audit report in Form 3CD in view of the delayed receipt of audit report from the office of the Registrar of Societies, stating it to be as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only on the conclusion of the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 19.11.2019, as we find the case to befor AY 2017-2018. That is, for both the years,s.274 notice stands issued within a reasonable time of the conclusion of the assessment proceedings. The assessee may not have filed the return for a particular year, as infact is the case for AY 2012-2013, so that the fact of non-furnishing the audit report u/s.44AB would not come to the notice of the Revenue. It is presumably for such like reasons that the Legislature had deemed it fit not to prescribe any time limitation for the issue of the said notice. Once commenced, the proceedings though are to be concluded within prescribed time. 5. In view of the foregoing, we find the assessee's cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
