9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee i.e. claim of deduction u/s 80P was denied to the assessee for the first time without any prior communication of proposed adjustment in respect of denial of claim u/s 80P - We observe that the assessee was denied any opportunity to file its objections to the adjustments made in the order / intimation issued by CPC with respect to denial of claim of deduction u/s 80P. Thirdly, we observe that in the instant facts it has not been disputed by the Department that the interest / dividend income was received by the assessee from other Co-operative Societies. On perusal of the return of income filed by the assessee also shows that the said deduction u/s 80P has been claimed by the assessee on the balance income after set off of current year and brought forward losses . Accordingly, there seems to be no justifiable basis for denying assessee s claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Act, in the instant set of facts. Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 55/Rjt/2023 - - - Dated:- 31-5-2023 - Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri B. D. Gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel Circle, Thane, in MA NO. 283 (MUM) OF 2020 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13], DATED APRIL 27, 2021. The gist of the judgment is: Section 254, read with section 80-IA, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal -Power of rectification (Recall of order) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Whether provisions of section 254(2) have narrow application and envisage rectification of mistakes which are apparent from record and there is power to rectify but not to review order - Held, yes -Assessee sought to recall order of Tribunal whereby claim of deduction under section 80-IA on interest on income-tax refund and interest earned by assesses on Fixed Deposits (FDs) held with bank had been denied - Assessee claimed that it was engaged only in one business of developing, operating and maintaining port terminals and intent to park funds in FDs was to secure funds so that assessee could fulfil its future obligations under agreement - Thus, income earned therefrom was directly linked and/or incidental to core business of assessee and therefore, it claimed that interest income was eligible for deduction under section 80-IA and since, this critical fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le to convert its character as a mistake apparent from record. The appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be dismissed. 7. In the result the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal of the assessee. At the outset, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the instant facts, the income (dividend / interest income) with respect to which deduction under Section 80P was claimed was received by the assessee from another Co-operative Society and hence, denial of deduction under Section 80P was a clear cut violation of the relevant provisions of law. There is no basis/ reason in the instant set of facts to deny the assessee s claim for deduction u/s 80P of the Act and therefore Ld. CIT(A) erred in facts and in law in holding that denial of deduction u/s 80P by CPC does not amount to a mistake apparent from record. The second contention of the Counsel for the assessee was that there was a complete variation between the communication sent by CPC regarding the proposed adjustment under Section 143(1) dated 03.01.2020 (against which the assessee had filed reply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s case and by simply holding that denial of claim of deduction under Section 80P(2) does not amount to a mistake apparent from record and in further holding that the point of difference between computation of book profit made by CPC and by the assessee were such which involved debatable issues and thus, was outside the purview of section 154 of the Act. Accordingly, the Counsel for the assessee requested that looking into the instant facts, the order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals) may be set-aside and claim of deduction under Section 80P may be allowed to the assessee. 7. In response, Ld. D.R. placed reliance on the observations made by Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 8. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. We observe that while on one hand the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the point of difference between computation of book profit made by CPC by denying the claim of deduction under Section 80P of the Act as such involved debatable issues and thus was outside the purview of Section 154 of the Act, but on the other hand he has upheld the denial of claim of deduction under Section 80P by wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
