Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (1) TMI 1316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5-1-2016 - R. P. Tolani (Judicial Member) And Vikram Singh Yadav (Accountant Member) For the Assessee : Mahedra Gargieya (CA) For the Revenue : Rajendra Singh (JCIT) ORDER Vikram Singh Yadav (Accountant Member) This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 27.10.2014 wherein the assessee has taken the following ground of appeal: 1.1 The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well s on the facts of the case in confirming the denial of the claim of deduction made by the Society u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The claim of deduction so denied/confirmed , being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts kindly be allowed claimed. 1.2 The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as wel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the order dated 17.07.2015 in ITA No. 999/JP/2011 for A.Y. 2008-09 (2015) 124 DTR 123(JP), order dated 11.082015 in ITA No. 177/JP/2013 for A.Y. 2009- 10 and order dated 30.10.2015 in ITA No.183/JP/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11. Vide these orders, the assessee was held entitled to the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2.1 The ld. DR is heard. He has supported the order of the lower authorities and prayed to upheld the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.3 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue under dispute relates to eligibility of the assessee u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act. The Co-ordinate Benches of the ITAT in its earlier decisions for A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 2010-11 hav .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Act would not apply to it. In view of such clarification, we cannot entertain the Revenue s contention that section 80P(4) would exclude not only the co-operative banks other than those fulfilling the description contained therein but also credit societies, which are not cooperative banks. In the present case, respondent assessee is admittedly not a credit cooperative bank but a credit co-operative society Exclusion clause of sub-section (4) of Section 80P, therefore, would not apply. In the result Tax Appeals are dismissed. By respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jafari Momin Vikas Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. (supra) on identical issue. We hold that the assessee is a cooper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates