9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the AO on account of disallowance of deduction claimed by the appellant u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act without considering the detailed submissions made by the appellant and without passing any speaking order, on the ground that only the income earned by providing credit facility to its members be treated as an activity covered u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and as the interest income is not operational income the same be treated as income from other sources not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act without appreciating the submissions given by the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) has erred while confirming the addition and failed to appreciate the following important facts: a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction u/s 80P of the Act, and on the facts and circumstances of the case has erred in confirming the action of the learned AO who did not allow proper and adequate deduction u/s 57(iii) of the Act from the interest income earned by the appellant society only on the ground appellant society failed to produce any evidence to show that it had expended any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn interest income from Co-operative Banks, Commercial Banks and other Financial Institutions in order to be eligible for deduction u/s 57 (iii) of the Act disregarding the submissions given by the appellant society. 5. The appellant may kindly be permitted to add to or alter any of grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary." Brief facts of the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Mahaveer Path for A.Y.2008-09 which has decided the same issue in favour of assessee in ITA No.2476/PUN/2016. In that case assessee had received interest income from fixed deposits kept with Nationalized Banks. The ITAT Pune Bench in para 5 has held as under : "5. With regard to this issue, the Ld. AR of the assessee at the time of hearing submitted that ground No.1 is already decided in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Pune in ITA No.589/PUN/2016 for the assessment year 2012-13 in the case of ITO Vs. Sureshdada Jain Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha, therein, in Para 2 of the order, the issue is as under: "2. The only grievance projected by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tgar's Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. 322 ITR 283 (SC). There being no direct judgment from the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court on the point, the Tribunal in Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit (supra) preferred to go with the view taken in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). In the absence of their being any change in the legal position prevailing on this issue after the passing of the order by the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit (supra) and host of other orders reiterating the similar view, respectfully following the precedent, we uphold the impugned order in allowing d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
