2018 (4) TMI 1833 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) - HELD THAT - Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of The Citizens Cooperative Society Ltd. 2017 (8) TMI 536 - SUPREME COURT held that in order to do the business of a cooperative bank, it is imperative to have a licence from the Reserve Bank of India. It can therefore be said that a co-operative society which does not possess a license from RBI cannot be equated to a co-operative Bank, even though it might indulge in the business of banking. We find force in the submissions of ld. AR of assessee because we find that the facts of the present case and the facts of that case i.e. The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT(supra) are not discussed we set aside the order of CIT (A) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh decision by way of a speaking and reasoned order - Appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the order of ld. CIT(A)-5, Bangalore dated 14.02.2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14.
2. Consideration of the latest judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra).

Analysis:

Issue 1: Appeal against CIT(A) Order
The appeal was filed by the revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A)-5, Bangalore for Assessment Year 2013-14. The grounds raised by the revenue included contentions that the CIT(A)'s order was opposed to the law and not in line with the facts of the case. Specific reference was made to the correctness of allowing the claim made by the assessee under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The revenue sought for the CIT(A)'s order to be reversed and the assessment order to be restored. The appellant also requested the option to add, alter, amend, or delete any other grounds before the hearing of the appeal.

Issue 2: Consideration of Latest Judgment
During the proceedings, the ld. DR of revenue highlighted that the ld. CIT(A) had not taken into account the later judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT, as reported in 397 ITR 1. The ld. AR of the assessee, on the other hand, suggested that the matter should be sent back to the file of AO/CIT(A) for a fresh decision after considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A) had not considered the latest judgment as it was rendered after the CIT(A)'s order. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision. The CIT(A) was directed to examine and compare the facts of the present case with the facts of the case in the judgment and then decide the issue afresh, ensuring both parties have an adequate opportunity to be heard.

In conclusion, the appeal filed by the revenue was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision in light of the latest judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court.

Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.