9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a speaking order. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA Nos.57/Coch/2020 And 40/Coch/2020 And S.P. Nos. 30 And 27/Coch/2020 - - - Dated:- 19-5-2020 - S/Shri Chandra Poojari, AM And George George K., JM For the Assessee : Shri T.M. Sreedharan, Sr. Adv. For the Revenue : Shri Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr. DR ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the different orders of the CIT(A), Kottayam for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The assessee has also filed Stay Petitions in S.P. Nos.30 27/Coch/2018. 1.1 Since the issue involved in these appeals and Stay Petitions are common in nature, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals in ITA No.57/Coch/2020: 1. It is respectfully submitted that the order of CIT(A) in ITA N0.314/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2018-19 dated 16.12.2019 dismissing the appeal for the A.Y. 2014-15 is opposed to law and facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The CIT(A) should have found that the issue as regards claim for deduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anthapuram District Cooperative Bank Ltd. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) and the same was disposed by order dated 31.10.2017 by allowing the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act but upholding the assessment order on disallowance under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. On further appeal, the ITAT in ITA 596/Coch/2017 order dated 29.01.2018 set aside the issue of allowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act to the Assessing Officer to verify whether Thiruvananthapuram District Cooperative Bank Ltd is a Cooperative Society and if so allow the deduction. The Assessing Officer has given appeal effect to the same by order dated 14.11.2018 and held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that it is not the case of the learned AR that the Assessing Officer has not followed the directions issued by Tribunal in the order dated 29.01.2018. The grounds of appeal raised in this appeal and the argument of the learned AR in this appeal are based on certain facts outside the Tribunal order dated 29.01.2018 and the same cannot be considered in the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s total income in computing the total income of the assessee. 7.1 As seen from the order of the CIT(A), the CIT(A) has given very cryptic findings and not addressed the above grounds. Hence, we remit this issue to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration by passing a speaking order. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Thus, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.57/Coch/2020 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 40/Coch/2020: AY 2015-16 8. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. It is respectfully submitted that the dismissal of appeal ITA No.630/TVM/CIT(A)TVM/M/2018-19 dated 16.12.2019 for the asst. year 2015-16 is erroneous in law and unsustainable. 2. The CIT(A) failed to consider that the assessing officer while giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) in ITA No.142/CIT(A)/TVM dated 27.11.2018, passed on 18.12.2018 sustained the addition of ₹ 5,58,61,604/- notwithstanding the direction of the CIT(A) as per above order dated 27.11.2018. The order giving effect was passed on 18.12.2018 and the same should be considered to be erroneous in as much as the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Tribunal vide order dated 14.11.2018 and held that the assessee is not eligible to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act on the interest income received from Thiruvananthapuram District Cooperative Bank Ltd. Following the said finding in the AY 2014-15, the Assessing Officer did not allow deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act for the AY 2015-16 also in the order giving effect to CIT(A) order. Therefore, the appeal effect order given by the Assessing Officer for AY 2015-16 is in accordance with the decision given by CIT(A) vide order dated 27.11.2018. 10. On appeal, the CIT(A) rejected the argument of the Ld. AR that the Assessing Officer has not followed the directions issued by CIT(A) in the appellate order dated 27.11.2018. The CIT(A) observed that the argument of the Ld. AR in this appeal are based on certain facts outside the appellate order dated 27.11.2018 and the same cannot be considered in the appeal against the order giving effect to the said appellate order. Therefore, the CIT(A) held that there is no merit in the arguments of the Ld. AR. The CIT(A) held that as the appeal effect order given by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 18.12.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
