9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee. DR was unable to bring any specific observation during the hearing. In our considered view, the appeal of the assessee is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to determine the income in the light of discussion indicated above. Needless to say, the assessee should get reasonable opportunity in set aside proceeding. Appeals of the assessee allowed for statistical purpose. - DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : None. For the Respondent : Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT. DR ORDER Per: Bench: A batch of four appeals of the assessee society were filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi, [in brevity the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY WHICH IS DOING THE BUSINESS OF BANKING (CALLED AS A CO- OPERATIVE BANK) CAN INVEST ITS FUND IN ANOTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN ORDER TO EARN INTEREST/ DIVIDEND INCOME AND CAN SHOW THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(d) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. FURTHER MORE IT WAS ALSO BEING HELD THAT THE WORDS THIS SECTION IN RELATION TO ANY CO- OPERATIVE BANK AS USED IN SUB SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P MEANS SUB SECTION (2)(a)(i) OF SECTION 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2) Whether assessee Co-operative Bank is functioning at par with the Commercial Banks because as per by-laws it can give loan only to its members and not to public at large, So provisions of section 80P(4) is applicable to i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. The assessee placed the written submission, and no adjournment petition was filed. Considering the issue, the matter is taken for adjudication as ex partequa for assessee after hearing the ld. DR. 5. The ld. DR vehemently argued and fully relied on the order of the revenue authorities. The ld. DR also invited our attention in the appeal order. The relevant para of the said order is reproduced as below: With regards to the case of the appellant, the interest and dividend income earned by the appellant bank is admittedly out of the investment of surplus funds and not in the course of normal business. The rationale of the above said decision is squarely applicable in the case of the appellant. Thus, the appellant is a co-oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year 2009-10 wherein the Tribunal has deleted the disallowance of the benefit u/s 80P(2) (d) of the Act by reversing the view taken by the learned CIT (A) in his order dated 12-03-2013 in appeal No.244/Bikaner/2011-12. As it is noticed that the learned CIT (A) has followed judicial discipline by deleting the disallowance by following the decision of the co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the immediately preceding year and as the Revenue has not been able to show any distinguishable facts, we are of the view that the finding of the learned CIT (A) is on right footing and does not call for any interference. As a result ground No.1 in both the Revenue s appeal stands dismissed. The issue is well adjudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ex cooperative society within the meaning of the State Act, 1984, it is not a co-operative bank within the meaning of Section 5(b) read with Section 56 of the BR Act, 1949. In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside. Consequently, we hold that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Act. The questions for consideration are answered accordingly. The order of the coordinate bench has followed the earlier order of assessee s own case. But we respectfully follow the higher judicial observation to ascertain the issue. The status of the cooperative bank where the investment was parked, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
