9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the order of the learned Assessing Officer cannot be interfered only for the reason that another view is possible while invoking the powers U/s.263 of the Act by the learned CIT. Relying on the above decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, we are of the considered view that the ld. Principal CIT is not justified in invoking the powers U/s. 263 of the Act in the relevant case before us. Therefore, we hereby quash the order passed by the ld. Principal CIT. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A. No. 1103/Mds/2015 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2016 - Shri N. R. S. Ganesan, Judicial Member And Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri T. Banusekar, CA For the Respondent : Shri S.Balasubramaniam, CIT ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessee-society, granted the benefit of deduction U/s. 80P of the Act. Subsequently, the learned Principal CIT opined that the assessee would not be eligible for deduction U/s. 80P because its members were classified as Class A and B viz., one with the voting power and the other without voting power. The learned Principal CIT was of the view that though the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal and certain other higher judiciary had decided the matter in favour of the assessee, the Department has filed appeal to keep the matter alive, and therefore it is binding on his part to invoke powers U/s. 263 of the Act, accordingly he held the order of the Assessing Officer to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and thereby i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ITAT, Chennai in the above case and has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Chennai, as substantial question of law is involved. Hence, in order to keep the issue alive and in line with the stand taken by the Department, the submissions of A.R are not accepted. 2.9 Coming to the issue of procurement of agricultural produce from non-members, i.e B class members, who do not have share capital ad do not have voting rights, and again selling the same to them, the A.R has submitted that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s SL(SPL), 151 Karkudalpatty Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs ITO by the Hon'ble ITAT, Chennai and in the case of S 6608 Narasingapuram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 of the ld. Principal CIT may be quashed. 5. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative argued in support of the order of the ld. Principal CIT. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. From the facts of the case it is apparent that the ld. Principal CIT has invoked his powers u/s. 263 because the identical issue was pending before the Hon ble Chennai High Court though the same was decided in favour of the assessee by this Bench of the Tribunal and also by other the higher judiciary. In these circumstances, it can be only considered, as another possible view on the issue. In the case of CIT vs Greenworld Corporation, reported in (2009)314 ITR 81, decided by the Hon ble Apex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
