9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n confirming the disallowance made of the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) on account of the interest income, being a credit cooperative society providing credit facility to its members. The disallowance so made and confirmation thereof being contrary to the provisions of facts and law, be deleted in full and the deduction as claimed please be directed to allowed in full. 3. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in alleging non-filing of certain details which is contrary to the facts and in fact, all the relevant details are admittedly available on records establishing the compliance of the conditions hence the Appellant be held entitled to the deduction as claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). 4. The appellant prays your honour indulgence to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing." 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that assessee has filed its return of income as AOP for AY 2019-20 on 29.08.2019 by admitting NIL income after claim of deduction under chapter VI of Income Tax Act for Rs. 5.08 lacs. The same was processed by ADIT, CPC, Benguluru, vide intimation u/s. 143(1) dated 18. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovisions of I.T Act with consequential time limits to file such Return of Income well within the time correctly and effectively so as to make use of claims of deductions as attributable to any Cooperative Society as per the provisions of I.T Act. However, though the appellant filed two separate appeals, one against the 143(1) order dated 18.04.2020 and the other against the 154 order dated 15.04.2021, appellant could not bring on record any reconcilable and verifiable facts of case resulting in reconciliation of correctness of its claims contrary to the observations of ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, in its order u/s 143(1) / 154 order dated 18.04.2020 and 15.04.2021 of I.T Act. Accordingly, appellant could not adduce any specific evidence and justification involving correct reconciliation of its e-filed Return of Income with applicable claims u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of ITA so as to consider appellant's grounds of appeal on this issue for its allowability as per I.T Act. Further, the fact of any mistake apparent from record as attributable to these orders is neither made available nor made is evidenced/advanced by the appellant with supporting proofs/justification as per I.T. Act. In the absenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le VIA for claiming deduction of section 80P as needed along with incorrect applicability of status other than co-op. society etc. The true extract of relevant 154 order is as under: The ld. CIT (A) thereafter reproduced the order u/s 154." In the meanwhile, since the appellant also filed appeal against the very intimation u/s 143(1) dated 18.04.2020 the ld. CIT further observed: "Without prejudice to the above 154 order, meanwhile appellant has filed appeal against 143(1) order dated 18.04.2020, precisely raising the ground for claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and could not adduce any further details as needed to reconcile with the e-filed return of appellant as filed for this AY 2019-20 for its correctness on its allow ability as per the provision of the I.T. Act. Further, appellant also filed another appeal against the above 154 order dated 15.04.2021 on 19.05.2021. Apparently, with the same grounds of appeal seeking for claim under section 80P(2)(a) of I.T. Act. In this appeal filed also, appellant could not reconcile the discrepancies as observed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru in its 154 order as extracted supra. In the light of these facts appellant's two appeals, one a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fiable. The filing of correct Return of Income by the appellant is a statutory obligation with due compliance involving defined provisions of I.T Act with consequential time limits to file such Return of Income well within the time correctly and effectively so as to make use of claims of deductions as attributable to any Cooperative Society as per the provisions of I.T Act. However, though the appellant filed two separate appeals, one against the 143(1) order dated 18.04.2020 and the other against the 154 order dated 15.04.2021, appellant could not bring on record any reconcilable and verifiable facts of case resulting in reconciliation of correctness of its claims contrary to the observations of ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, in its order u/s 143(1)/154 order dated 18.04.2020 and 15.04.2021 of I.T Act. Accordingly, appellant could not adduce any specific evidence and justification involving correct reconciliation of its e-filed Return of Income with applicable claims u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of I.T Act so as to consider appellant's grounds of appeal on this issue for its allowability as per I.T Act. Further, the fact of any mistake apparent from record as attributable to these orders is neithe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ludes- (i) an individual, (ii) a Hindu undivided family, (iii) a company, (iv) a firm, (v) an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, (vi) a local authority, and (vii) every artificial juridical person, not falling within any of the preceding subclauses; A perusal of the above definition reveals that there is no separate status shown by the Act in the name of Cooperative Society as wrongly alleged in the impugned order. As a matter of practice and rightly so, a Cooperative Society is normally considered as AOP falling u/s 3(1)(v) of the Act. The appellant accordingly applied for the PAN and its PAN also shows in the capacity of AOP/Trust. There apart, in the ITR (PB 1) the appellant has shown the status as AOP/BOI and again in ITR 5 under, at pg. 1(PB 4) after mentioning AOP/BOI, the sub-status has been shown as other cooperative society. It is not known as from where this ground has been taken that deduction u/s 80P is not meant for status other than cooperative society, when the appellant has been filing in the same status as can be seen from the returns for other years as well, Kindly refer ITR for A.Y. 2020-21(PB 28)s. Thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with Computation u/s 139 dt. 29.08.2019 1-3 2. Copy of ITR Form (relevant extract only) 4-7 3. Copy of Bye Laws of Credit Cooperative Society dated 11.06.2014 8-22 4. Copy of Rectification application u/s 154 dated 18.04.2020 23 5. Copy of Written Submission filed on dated 9.10.2022 in response to Notice u/s 250 datec 08.09.2022 24-25 6. Copy of Written Submission filed on dated 20.04.2023 in response to Notice u/s 250 dated 06.04 20'23 _ 26-27 7. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has correctly claimed the deduction u/s. 80P as per copy of the ITR placed on record at paper book page 5 wherein the assessee has claimed the deduction of Rs. 5,08,493/- u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Since the object of the assessee is to lend the money the deduction claimed by the assessee is allowable. As regards the contention of the status as AOP and not mentioned as cooperative society the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that there is no separate status for the co-operative society as per the definition given in the section 2(31) of the Act. To drive home to the similar contention so raised by the revenue the assessee relied upon the decision of the co-ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
