9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 977 - HC - Income TaxDisallowances u/s 80IB - no separate books were maintained or separate balance sheet were filed claiming deduction - Held that - Tribunal upholding the order of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowances relied upon its earlier order in the case of Banaskantha District Cooperative Milk Producers Union 2010 (2) TMI 1197 - ITAT AHMEDABAD also confirmed by HC 2012 (1) TMI 310 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT wherein on identical facts it was held that even if no separate books were maintained or separate balance sheet were filed deduction under Section 80IB of the Act cannot be denied.We see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal. - Decided against revenue Disallowances under Section 80(P)(2)(d) - interest earned on the fixed deposit with Cooperative Bank and the Societies - Held that - Considering Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act when the only requirement was that the income should be received from investment in Cooperative Societies and the Cooperative Bank which in the present case has been fulfilled it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error in deleting disallowance under Section 80(P(2)(d) of the Act. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Tribunal.- Decided against revenue
Issues:
1. Disallowance under Section 80IB of the Act 2. Disallowance under Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act Analysis: Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 80IB of the Act The appeal was against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 27.09.2013 for AY 2009-10. The Tribunal had deleted disallowances under Section 80IB of the Act. The High Court noted that the Tribunal relied on a previous decision in a similar case, Banaskantha District Cooperative Milk Producers Union. This earlier decision was confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The Court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's decision based on the precedent. Therefore, the proposed question A was answered against the Revenue, and the appeal on this issue failed. Issue 2: Disallowance under Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act Regarding the disallowance under Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act, the assessee claimed deduction on interest earned from fixed deposits with Cooperative Bank and Societies. The Court observed that the income was indeed received from investments in Cooperative Societies and the Cooperative Bank, meeting the requirements of Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act. The Court agreed with the Tribunal's decision to delete the disallowance under this section. Consequently, the proposed question B was also answered against the Revenue. The Court dismissed the Tax Appeal on this issue as well. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decisions on both issues, finding no errors in the application of the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act. The Tax Appeal was dismissed in its entirety.
|
