2004 (4) TMI 19 - HC - Income Tax

Claim for setting off the relief u/s 80J - CIT noticed that the initial AY for which the assessee had become entitled to the deduction was the AY 1978-79 and so as per the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 80J the assessee being a cooperative society could carry forward and set off the deduction under section 80J against the income up to the assessment year 1984-85 only. The Commissioner also took the view that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) was not in order as the assessee was not one engaged in the business of banking or providing credit facilities for its members. - Tribunal after elaborately considering the matter upheld the order of the Commissioner Held that Tribunal rightly rejected the plea of the assessee that six year period will have to be considered from the AY 1984-85 and not from the initial AY 1978-79.

Issues:
1. Interpretation of provisions under section 80J of the Income-tax Act for setting off relief.
2. Validity of deductions under section 80P(2)(a) for a cooperative society engaged in sugar manufacturing.
3. Revision of assessments under section 263 of the Income-tax Act based on Commissioner's notice.
4. Appeal against the common order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding deductions under sections 80J and 80P(2)(a).

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a cooperative society engaged in sugar manufacturing, claimed setting off relief under section 80J for assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89. The Commissioner of Income-tax observed that the deduction under section 80J could only be carried forward until the assessment year 1984-85 based on the initial assessment year of 1978-79. The Tribunal correctly upheld this view, considering the specific provisions of section 80J(2) and the time limit for deduction eligibility. The Tribunal's decision was deemed appropriate and in accordance with the law.

2. The Commissioner also disallowed deductions under section 80P(2)(a) for the cooperative society as it was engaged in sugar manufacturing, not banking or credit facilities provision. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner's decision on disallowing deductions under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(a)(iii). The Tribunal's reasoning was sound, aligning with the statutory requirements and the nature of the appellant's business activities.

3. The Commissioner issued a notice under section 263 of the Income-tax Act to revise the assessments for the relevant years. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to modify the assessments by withdrawing the deduction under section 80J and disallowing deductions under section 80P(2)(a). The Tribunal's decision to uphold the Commissioner's directive for revision was legally justified and aimed at ensuring compliance with the Income-tax Act.

4. The appellant filed appeals against the Tribunal's common order regarding deductions under sections 80J and 80P(2)(a). However, the High Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the Tribunal's decision as correct and in line with the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The Court found no grounds for interference, indicating that the Tribunal's conclusions were legally sound and adequately reasoned.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, confirming the disallowance of deductions under section 80J and 80P(2)(a) for the cooperative society engaged in sugar manufacturing. The judgment emphasized adherence to statutory provisions and the correct interpretation of tax laws in determining the eligibility and scope of deductions for the appellant.

← Previous Next →