9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the order of the CIT(A), dated 11.09.2019. The relevant assessment year is 2015-2016. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:- 1. The order of appeal of the learned CIT(A), Bengaluru passed under section 250 of the Act in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, facts and circumstances in the Appellant s case. 2. The learned CIT(A) Bengaluru-6, Bengaluru has erred in law and facts of the case in holding interest earned as other income , in the light of introduction of RERA. 3. The learned CIT(A) Bengaluru-6, Bengaluru is not justified in law in denying the eligible deduction claimed by the appellant as per provisions of section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. The order of assessment passed by the learned Assessing Officer is bad in law in adding a sum of ₹ 40,30,479, on protective basis, based on SLP filed by the Department before Hon ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Shri Biluru Gurubasava Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamita. 5. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and facts of the case, failed to appreciate that the interest income earned by the appellant out of the deposits kept in the co-operati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vijay Souharda Credit Sahakari Ltd. (supra) on which reliance was placed by ld. DR of revenue as per which the matter was restored back to AO to examine the applicability of the judgment of Hon ble Apex Court rendered in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra), I find that in the present case, this is not the case of the AO as per the assessment order that this judgment of Hon ble Apex Court rendered in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) is applicable in the present case. As per the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) also, no finding of ld. CIT(A) is there that this judgment rendered in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) is applicable in the present case. Hence, I hold that this judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has no applicability in the present case in view of the facts discussed above. Regarding the argument of ld. DR of revenue that the earlier Tribunal order rendered by the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Udaya Souharda Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. (supra) should be followed in preference to the later decision of SMC bench of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-operatives are different and that cooperative registered as Souharda Sahakari cannot be regarded as co-operative societies is unsustainable. After holding so, the Tribunal restored back the matter to the AO for fresh decision regarding allowability of deduction u/s. 80P of the IT Act after examining the fulfilment of other conditions in that regard. For ready reference, we reproduce para nos. 5 to 11 of this Tribunal order rendered in the case of Siddartha Pattina Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha Vs. ITO (supra) by SMC bench of the Tribunal on 26.07.2019. These paras are as under: 5. I have heard the rival submissions. The learned counsel for the Assessee submitted that Souharda Sahakari registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 are also co-operative societies within the meaning of Sec.2(19) of the Act and therefore the revenue authorities were not justified in denying the benefit of deduction to the Assessee. The learned DR relied on a decision of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of M/s. Millennium Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs. ITO ITA Nos. 2606 2607/Bang/2017 in which the Tribunal followed the decision of ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of M/s. Uda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve movement. The state and the central governments were investing millions of rupees in the form of shares, grants, subsidy, contributions, government support, etc., but the expected results couldn t be achieved in cooperative movements. This condition continued almost until early 1980s. 9. Keeping this in mind, the Central Government setup a committee under the Chairmanship of Shri Ardhanarishwaran, which submitted its report in 1987. It attributed the failure of the cooperative movement to the excessive interference of the governments. It is also true that the unabated party politics in the co-operative movement is also a big hindrance to its progress. Realizing the vital role of the cooperative movement in the progress of the society, the Central Planning Commission set up a committee by appointing Shri Chaudari Brahmaprakash as its head with a task of drafting a Model Cooperative Act which will prevent interference of the governments. This committee, after a detailed study of the Cooperative Acts of various states, drafted a Model Cooperative Act in 1991 and Central Government recommended the state governments to adopt this. Accordingly, in 1997 a bill on paralle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
