ACIT, Chandigarh V. Pb. State Federation of Co-op House Building Society Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 1010/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64072 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, A.M AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M ITA NO. 1010/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 4(1) V PUNJAB STATE FED OF COOP CHANDIGARH HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD SCO 150-152, SEC 34-A CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI M.R. SHARMA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. SAINI DATE OF HEARING 13.12.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.12.2012 O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, A.M THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), CHANDIGARH DATED 28.7.2012. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DELETING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) O F THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 12,03,242/- BY HOLDING THAT DENIAL OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT IS DEBATABLE. 3 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND HAS RECEIVED INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 4020808/- FROM VARIOUS BANKS AGAIN ST WHICH DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) WAS CLAIMED. THIS INCOME W AS RETURNED AS INCOME FROM BUSINESS WHICH WAS HELD TO BE INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DED UCTION U/S 80P WAS DENIED. THIS ADDITION WAS ULTIMATELY DELET ED BY THE TRIBUNAL BUT ON FURTHER APPEAL THE ADDITION WAS CON FIRMED BY HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT. THE PENALTY H AS BEEN DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY HOLDING THAT THE ISSUE IS DEBTABLE. 4 BEFORE US, THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE STRONGLY SU PPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 5 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESS EE POINTED OUT THAT VERY FACT THE ADDITION WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND LATER ON CONFIRMED BY THE HIGH COURT S HOWS THAT THE ISSUE WAS DEBATABLE, THEREFORE, THE PENALTY WA S NOT LEVIABLE. IN THIS CONNECTION, HE RELIED ON THE DEC ISION OF HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT V. BUDDHEWAL COOP SUGAR MILLS, 312 ITR 92 (PH). 6 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULLY AN D FIND THAT IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT ORIGINALLY THE DISALLO WANCE WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THE DEDUCTION WAS ALLOW ED. THIS ITSELF SHOWS THAT THE CLAIM WAS OF DEBATABLE NATURE . FURTHER WE FIND THAT IN CASE OF CIT V. BUDDHEWAL COOP SUGAR MI LLS (SUPRA), THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT HAS DELETED THE PENALTY. IN THAT CASE IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: HELD, DISMISSING THE APPEAL, THAT THE SOCIETY HAD PAID ADVANCE TAX AS WELL AS SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX NOT TAKI NG INTO ACCOUNT THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(A)(III) OF THE ACT. IT WAS EVIDENT FROM THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESS EES CLAIM WAS BONA FIDE AND THAT ALL THE PARTICULARS RE LATING TO THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME HAD BEEN DISCLOSED. THUS , THE TRIBUNAL RIGHTLY CANCELLED THE PENALTY LEVIED. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISI ON, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CORRECTLY DE LETED THE PENALTY AND WE CONFIRM THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 18.12.2012. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEM BER DATED : 18 .12. 2012 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR 3