9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd [ 2021 (9) TMI 419 - ITAT MUMBAI] wherein the bench has dealt the similar issue and allowed the deduction even though the same was not claimed by the assessee in that return of income filed in that case. Whereas, the bench has noted that in this case the assessee has claimed the deduction and therefore, merely without specifying how the claim of the assessee is not correctly claimed and the same cannot be denied in the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act. In the light of these set of facts the ld. AO is directed to allow the claim of the assessee as claimed in the ITR u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, JM And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai For the Assessee : Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. For the Revenue : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal filed by assessee is arising out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 26/05/2023 [here in after (NFAC)/ ld. CIT(A)] for assessment year 2019-20 which in turn arise from the order dated 18.04.2020 passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, by ADIT, CPC, Bangalore. 2. In this appeal, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Apropos to the grounds so raised the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is reiterated here in below: 2.3 It is a fact on record that appellant has filed its e-Return of Income as applicable for A.Y 2019-20 by making a claim u/s 80P of I.T Act. However, apparently, the e-filed return was not correctly filed as applicable to the claim u/s 80P of I.T Act involving correct filling of relevant Schedule VIA claim as needed as per I.T Act in the e-filed ROI by duly fulfilling the required conditions as applicable to Cooperative Society involved in the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of I.T Act. In the light of these facts, apparently, appellant's claim was not allowed as the relevant statutory return of income as filed by the appellant as applicable to a Cooperative Society with its correct status is not duly reflected in the relevant columns of e-filed return of the appellant as observed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, while passing the rectification order u/s 154 of I.T Act dated 15.04.2021 as already extracted supra. in the light of these facts, appellant's mere claim that the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of I.T Act needs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. CIT(A), challenging the finding of the ld. CIT(A) on the ground as stated herein above. The only issue raised in this appeal is allowability of deduction claimed by the assessee u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In support of the grounds so raised the ld. AR of the assessee, has filed the written submissions in respect of the various grounds raised by the assessee and the same is reproduced herein below. Brief General Facts: The facts noted by the CIT (A) at Page 2 Para 2 are: The brief facts of the case involve that appellant 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 143(1) order dated 18.04.2020 by assessing the total income at Rs. 5,19,150 as against of Rs. 10,165 admitted by the appellant. Apparently, appellant claim as AOP under section 80P(2a)(i) is not allowed is the contention of the appellant, against this 143(1) order dated 18.04.2020. Aggrieved by the order, appellant has filed rectification application under section 154 of the I.T. Act and same was duly processed by ADIT, CPC, Benguluru vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : During the course of the appellate proceedings the appellant filed detailed submissions dated 09.10.2022 (PB 24-25), 22.10.2022, 20.04.2023 (PB 26-27) uploaded on 24.04.2023 and 28.04.2023 The ld. CIT(A) however dismissed the appeal by holding as under: 2.3 It is a fact on record that appellant has filed its e-Return of Income as applicable for A.Y 2019-20 by making a claim u/s 80P of I.T Act. However, apparently, the e-filed return was not correctly filed as applicable to the claim u/s 80P of I.T Act involving correct filling of relevant Schedule VIA claim as needed as per I.T Act in the e-filed ROI by duly fulfilling the required conditions as applicable to Cooperative Society involved in the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of I.T Act. In the light of these facts, apparently, appellant's claim was not allowed as the relevant statutory return of income as filed by the appellant as applicable to a Cooperative Society with its correct status is not duly reflected in the relevant columns of e-filed return of the appellant as observed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, while passing the rectification order u/s 154 of I.T Act dated 15.04.2021 as already extracted supra. In the ligh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... general ground and shall be considered while deciding other grounds of appeal GOA -2: Disallowance for deduction made u/s 80(2)(a)(i): 1. Assessee is a Credit Cooperative Society: At the outset it is submitted that the assesse is a registered co-operative society working to serve its members. The society is duly registered under Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912.The operational area of the society is Ajmer and most of the members of the society are agriculturists. Also there is no dispute between the parties that the appellant is earning income on providing credit facilities to its members as required/s 80P(2)(a)(i). This is evident from the main objectives of the Appellant- Society, reproduced hereunder: Thus, on merits there appears no denial or doubt as regards the eligibility of the assessee to get the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, nor therefore, has been made a ground of denial. 2. The Appellant- Society has been denied deduction merely on some procedural, technical and non-existing grounds which are completely unjustified in the eyes of law. The first ground of denial was that the deduction was not meant for the status other than cooperative society and that the dedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here can be now also, that the status of a cooperative society claiming a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) shall always be AOP. A useful reference can be made to the decision in the case of Shri Datta Prasad Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. vs. the ITO-26(3)(2) Mumbai in ITA No./6029/MUM/2019 For A.Y.-2011-12, where the Hon ble ITAT Mumbai vide its order dated 08.09.2021, where the assessee wrongly filled in the status of firm as against AOP and thereafter, filed rectification u/s 154 correcting the mistake which was rejected by the AO and CIT(A) both, however, the Hon ble ITAT in para 12 directed the AO to make the correction of the status of the assessee from Firm to AOP. Thus, it was agreed by the revenue also and by the Hon ble ITAT that the status of a cooperative society claiming this type of deduction was correctly AOP only. In the present case, CPC Bangalore, though alleged wrong status but has not at all shown how it was wrong or what was the correct status for a society like the present one that is the Appellant-Cooperative society for claiming the subjected deduction. In this way, the said ITAT decision supports the case of the Assessee. It is therefore, humbly prayed that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is that the assessee vide ITR filed, paper book page 5 wherein the assessee has correctly mentioned the claim u/s 80P(2)(a)(i), Banking / credit facilities to its members for an amount of Rs. 5,08,493/-. Thus, so far as the claim of the assessee as made in the ITR there is no discussion as on what reason the same is not correctly claimed. Considering the object of the society being lending money to its member the deduction is correctly claimed by the assessee in his return of income filed and so the reasons advanced by the revenue on this part has no force and are purely based on surmises and conjecture. As regards the status showing as AOP we have gone through the definition of person given in section 2(31) of the Act wherein there is no separate status for co-operative society to mentioned and therefore, the mentioned of the status as AOP also does not disqualify the assessee to claim the deduction. Therefore, denial of the deduction on that second reasons is also not correct. We get the support of our view from the decision of co-ordinate bench of Mumbai in ITA no. 6029/Mum/2019 in the case of Shree Datta Prasad Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., wherein the bench has dealt the similar i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
