9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT (A) in appellant’s own case for A.Ys. 2007-08, 2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. In view of the above, it is held that the Assessing Officer is not justified to make addition - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 3913/Del/2016 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2018 - SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. B. S. Rajpurohit, Sr DR For The Respondent : Sh. P. S. Kashyap, CA ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 17/04/2016 passed by CIT(A)-Ghaziabad, Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on facts in not Section 80P of the Act, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income. It was also observed by the Assessing Officer that the IFFCO from whom dividend was received was not a company but was a cooperative society and dividend distribution tax had not been deducted by IFFCO. It was held by the Assessing Officer that the dividend income was not exempt in the hands of the assessee. Thus, the amount of ₹ 1,82,02,860/- was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that the dividend received from IFFCO is exempt u/s 80P(2)(1) of the Income Tax Act, as per the claim of the assessee. But the Assessing Officer rightly observe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... correct as the claim is admissible u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. It may be submitted that the appellant is a cooperative society and the dividend paying concern i.e. Indian Farmer Fertilizer cooperative Ltd. is also a society. Since the dividend income derived by the appellant is from a concern which is also a cooperative society, the whole of such income is exempt u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T. Act. It may very humbly be submitted that exactly similar issue had also arisen in the assessment year 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 where Ld. Predecessors and your honor had been pleased to accept the claim of the appellant. Copies of those decisions are enclosed herewith for ready reference. In view of the above submissions, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s concerned, the fact that it is a cooperative society is an established fact in earlier years and this year also the A.O. has mentioned that it is a cooperative society. As far as the U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. is concerned, the A.O. has not mentioned anything about it. I have verified that it is cooperative society as is ascertainable from the Registration Certificate produced by the appellant and on my behest the appellant has also produced I.T. Return of the Bank wherein the status is mentioned to be cooperative society. Even otherwise it is not the case of the A.O. that U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. is a company. Thus, the amount of ₹ 1,82,02,860/- being dividend received from the aforesaid cooperative societies is expressly exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
