9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has preferred the present Tax Appeals assailing the following orders: Tax Appeal No. Date of Tribunal's order ITA/CO No. Assessment Year 93 of 2008 01/05/07 3848/Ahd/2002 1991-92 94 of 2008 01/05/07 3849/Ahd/2002 1992-93 95 of 2008 01/05/07 3850/Ahd/2002 1993-94 96 of 2008 01/05/07 3851/Ahd/2002 1994-95 2. These matters were admitted by this Court for consideration of the following substantial question of law: TAX APPEAL No. 93 OF 2008 Whether the assessee co-operative society was entitled under sec. 80P(2)(d) of the entire interest of Rs. 10,17,976/- received by it from the cooperative Bank? TAX APPEAL No. 94 OF 2008 Whether the assessee co-operative society was entitled under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 581753 67618 4. Mr. Manish Shah, learned advocate appearing for the assessee has drawn the attention of this Court to Sections 28, 36(1), 56, 57 and 80P of the Act and contended that same deductions were allowed in the previous years. He submitted that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Excel Industries reported in 358 ITR 295, the respondent could not have taken a stand different than previous year . He has also relied upon the following decisions: (I) Bai Bhuriben Lallubhai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay North Cutch and Saurashtra reported in [1956] 29 ITR 543 (Bom) (II) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Doaba Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd reported in [1998] 230 ITR 774 (P & H) (III) Kaira ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions. He has relied upon the decisions in the following cases: (I) Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid V. Sangh Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income tax reported in 203 ITR 1027: (II) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Surat District Cooperative Milk Producers' Union Ltd reported in [1995] 211 ITR 726 (Guj) (III) Commissioner of Income tax vs. Rajasthan Rajya Sahkari Upbhokta Sangh Ltd reported in [1995] 215 ITR 448 (Raj) (IV) Commissioner of Income - tax - I, Lucknow vs. U.P. Co-operative Sugar Factories reported in [2013] 37 taxmann.com 58 (Allahabad) 6.1 Mr. Mehta submitted that the income exempted under Section 80P(2) has to be arrived at separately in order to determine the income under Section 80P(2) and it can never be envisaged that the total ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preciate that the point was otherwise covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Petlad Taluka Purchase and Sales Union (Supra) and even the revenue's Reference Application against the said decision was rejected. The Revenue has not challenged the said order further thereby accepting the same. Even on the said ground, the contention of the assessee is required to be accepted. 8. We have considered the decisions cited by learned advocate for the assessee as well as the revenue. We feel that the decisions cited by the learned advocate for the assessee shall be applicable on the facts of the present case. In the case of K. Nandakumar (supra), the Kerala High Court has held as under: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80AB has no application to the facts of these cases. The interest paid on the loan transactions has to be deducted from the business income, and not from the interest received from the bank on the fixed deposits. The assessees were therefore right in the submissions which they made before the Commissioner of Income-tax in the revision petitions which they filed. This aspect of the matter has been overlooked by the Commissioner in passing the order, exhibit P-5." 8.1 Similarly, in the case of Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd (supra), the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held as under: "5. The contention of Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, is that the Tribunal was wrong in allowing deduction under Section 80P(2) (d) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Central Excise and Customs, AIR 1970 SC 755, 759. 8. Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act allows whole deduction of an income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investment with any other co-operative society. This provision does not make any distinction in regard to source of the investment because this Section envisages deduction in respect of any income derived by the co-operative society from any investment with a co-operative society. It is immaterial whether any interest paid to the cooperative society exceeds the interest received from the bank on investments. The Revenue is not required to look to the nature of the investment whether it was from its surplus funds or otherwise. The Act does not sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
