9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. The return income was declaring loss of Rs. 1,17,45,264/was accepted under Section 143 (1). The A.O. issued notice under Section 143 (2) as well as under Section 142 (1) of the Act. In the return filed by the assessee, it had claimed long term capital loss of Rs. 2,19,33,697/and short term capital gain of Rs. 91,72,272/resulting into a gross total loss of Rs. 1,17,45,264/. The assessee filed revised return and thereby withdrew the claim of loss, however no such revised return was found and it was held by A.O. that no revised return was filed for withdrawing such claim. Therefore, the A.O. reopened the assessment under Sections 147/148 and ultimately in the final computation of income, the A.O. disallowed the exemption to short term / lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law in allowing the deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) in contradiction to the assessee having income from capital gains not attributable to regular banking business of the assessee ?" Tax Appeal No.1529 of 2009 is also with respect to the same assessee for the assessment year 2001-02. The Assessing Officer, once again noted that the decision of Surat District Cooperative Bank was not accepted by the Department and therefore denied deduction under section 80P of the Act in respect of what he referred to as non-banking profit. When the matter was carried before the CIT (Appeals), he took somewhat a different stand. CIT (Appeals) was of the opinion that certain proceeds on sale of securities were invested by the assessee with Madhavpura Mercanti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncerned, it does not pose any serious difficulty. As already noted, the assessee was relying on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Surat District Cooperative Bank (supra). At the stage when the Assessing Officer decided the issue, the Revenue had carried the decision in further appeal. However, subsequently, by virtue of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of C.I.T. v. Karnataka State Coop. Apex Bank, 251 ITR 194, the entire issue has been settled and decided in favour of the assessee. The Apex Court held and observed that there is nothing in the phraseology of section 80P(2)(a)(i) which makes it applicable only to income derived from working or circulating capital. It was further observed that from inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
