9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, Vadodara holding that the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) on 22.01.2021 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue to the extent of issue relating to deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income from Keira District Central Co.Op. Bank of Ltd. of Rs. 15,70,347/- without making adequate inquiry is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The order passed by u/s. 263 on 27.03.2023 by Pr.CIT-1 Vadodara holding the order of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) on 22.01.2021 as erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue is illegal and unlawful. The Id. Pr. CIT has erred in law and or on facts in invoking the powers of revision u/s. 263 of the Act, since the condition precedent were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive Banks amounting to Rs. 48,84,758/- and declared net profit of Rs. 41,09,258/- under the head income from business or profession. The PCIT observed that the assessee claimed total deduction amounting to Rs. 36,18,006/- under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The assessee earned interest on loans amounting to Rs. 21,55,938/-, interest from Central Bank of India of Rs. 11,58,472/- and interest from Kaira District Central Co-operative Bank amounting to Rs. 15,70,347/-. The Assessing Officer treated the interest earned from Central Bank of India as income from other sources and disallowed the same but allowed the deduction in respect of interest earned from Kaira District Central Co-operative Bank. The PCIT invoked Section 263 of the Act and is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . AR further submitted that invocation of Section 263 Explanation-2 in the present case is uncalled for and is not justifiable as the verification of the proper enquiry was made by the Assessing Officer at the assessment stage and in fact the second opinion cannot be the scope of provisions envisaged under Section 263 of the Act. Thus, the ld. AR submitted that the order passed under Section 263 of the Act is not justifiable. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the PCIT passed under Section 263 of the Act and also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
