9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 2033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent : Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, DR ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in appeal No. CIT(A)-33/Rg.21/621/2015-16 dated 06.04.2017. The assessment was framed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-21(2), Mumbai (in short ACIT / AO ) for the A.Y. 2013-14 vide order dated 09.02.2016 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ). 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned from co-operative Banks. For this assessee has raised the following ground No. 2 (a) to (d): - 2. a. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in disallowing the claim of Deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of ₹ 73,23,824/- on the ground that co-operative bank does not fan under the purview of a Co-operative Society referred in section 80P(2)(d) by ignoring the explanation offered b. The Ld. CIT A) ought to have considered that Co-operative Banks in which the appellant has invested are in-fact Co-oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, now assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is squarely covered by Tribunal s decision in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-op Society Ltd. vs. ITO [2018] 94 taxmann.com 15 (Mumbai - Trib.), wherein Tribunal has considered the issue in great detail vide Para 6 to 9 as under: - 6. We have heard the authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. We find that our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought to adjudicate as to whether the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80P(2)(d), in respect of interest income earned from the investments made with the co-operative banks is in order or not. We find that the issue involved in the present appeal hinges around the adjudication of the scope and gamut of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, as had been made available on the statute by the legislature vide the Finance Act 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007. We find that the lower authorities had taken a view that pursuant to insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, the assessee would no more be entitled for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould no more be applicable in relation to any co-operative bank, other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank, but however, are unable to subscribe to their view that the same shall also jeopardise the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest income on their investments parked with a co-operative bank. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the issue before us and are of the considered view that as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a co-operative society from its investments made with any other co-operative society, the claim of deduction under the aforesaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d) would be duly available. We may herein observe that the term 'co-operative society' had been defined under Sec. 2(19) of the Act, as under: - '(19) Co-operative society means a cooperative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any state for the registration of co-operative societies;' We are of the considered view, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rative society towards deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income on the investments parked with a co-operative bank. We further find that the reliance place by the ld. D.R on the order of the ITAT F bench, Mumbai in the case of Vaibhav Cooperative Credit Society (supra) is also distinguishable on facts. We find that the said order was passed by the Tribunal in context of adjudication of the entitlement of the assessee co-operative bank towards claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. We find that it was in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts that the Tribunal after carrying out a conjoint reading of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i) r.w. Sec. 80P(4) had adjudicated the issue before them. We are afraid that the reliance placed by the ld. D.R on the aforesaid order of the Tribunal being distinguishable on facts, thus, would be of no assistance for adjudication of the issue before us. Still further, the reliance placed by the Ld. D.R on the order of the ITAT 'SMC' Bench, Mumbai in the case of Shri Sai Datta Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. (supra), would also not be of any assistance, for the reason that in the said matter the Tribunal had set aside the issue to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
