2016 (9) TMI 1558 - AT - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 - claim of deduction u/s.80P - HELD THAT - As decided in own case 2014 (4) TMI 355 - ITAT MUMBAI identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in the assessee s own case mentioned above. Following the consisting view taken on the identical issue, we are of the view that the assessee Cooperative Society does not fall within the restrictions placed u/s. 80P of the Act. In view of the said circumstances when the controversy is quite clear which has been decided in favour of the assessee, we are of the view that the order u/s.263 of the Act is not liable to be sustainable in the eyes of law because the order is not erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Accordingly we set aside the order in question dated 25.03.2014. The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Challenge to the validity of the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Classification of the assessee as a Co-operative Bank or Society.
3. Claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act.
4. Failure to consider relevant submissions by the Commissioner of Income Tax.
5. Adjudication based on previous judicial decisions and appellate orders.

Detailed Analysis:
Issue 1: The assessee challenged the validity of the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, contending that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had previously ruled in their favor in a similar case for the assessment year 2010-11. The Tribunal held that the assessee Co-operative Society did not fall within the restrictions of section 80P of the Act, as per previous decisions. Consequently, the order under section 263 was deemed unsustainable and set aside, allowing the assessee's appeal.

Issue 2: The classification of the assessee as a Co-operative Bank or Society was a crucial point of contention. The Assessing Officer raised concerns regarding the change in classification over the years and the nature of business conducted by the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax found the classification to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, leading to the order under section 263. However, the Tribunal, based on previous decisions and the actual nature of the business, concluded that the assessee did not fall within the restrictions of section 80P, thereby overturning the Commissioner's order.

Issue 3: The dispute revolved around the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim for the assessment year 2010-11, prompting the proposal under section 263 for the assessment year 2009-10. The Tribunal, considering the documents filed by the appellant society and previous appellate orders, found in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the deduction was valid and not prejudicial to revenue.

Issue 4: The assessee contended that the Commissioner of Income Tax failed to consider all relevant submissions before passing the order under section 263. The Tribunal, after reviewing the case and relevant judicial decisions, concluded that the order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, thereby allowing the appeal and setting aside the Commissioner's order.

Issue 5: The Tribunal extensively relied on previous judicial decisions and appellate orders to adjudicate the matter. Citing consistent views on similar issues, the Tribunal held that the assessee did not fall within the restrictions of section 80P of the Act. By following the precedent set by previous decisions, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the order under section 263, ruling in favor of the assessee.