Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2696 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
06-07-2023
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
D
Next Hearing Date
04-07-2023
Assessment Year
2017-2018
Appeal Filed On
25-04-2022
Judgement Text
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ᭠यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.120/AHD/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 The Lunawada Taluka Primary School Teachers Co.operative Credit Society, Parama, Lunawada, Mahisagar-389230. PAN: AAAAT2876M Vs. P.C.I.T, Vadodara-1, Vadodara. And आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.121/AHD/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Asstt. Years: 2017-2018 The Lunawada Urban Co.operative Credit Society Ltd., Fuwara Chowk, Lunawada, Mahisagar-389230. PAN: AAFAT9358Q Vs. P.C.I.T, Vadodara-1, Vadodara. (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Urvashi Shodhan, A.R Revenue by : Shri Sanjeev Kumar Dev, Sr.D.R सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05/07/2023 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R ITA nos.120-121/AHD/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 2 PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned two appeals have been filed at the instance of the different Assessee against the separate orders of the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act erred in holding the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is a society and engaged in the activity of providing credit facilities to the members. The assessee in the year under consideration has earned interest income from the Co-operative Bank amounting to Rs. 20,11,805/- and claimed the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. According to the Ld. PCIT such interest income was not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act but the same has been wrongly allowed by the AO. Therefore, the assessment has been framed at the lesser income. Accordingly, the order passed by the AO is erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. The Ld. AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 21 and submitted that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of SBI Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 72 taxmann.com, 64 (2016) has held that the interest from the Co-operative Bank is eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. ITA nos.120-121/AHD/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 3 5.1 The Ld. A.R further submitted that this tribunal in the case of Sardar Patel Co-operative Credit Society Limited bearing ITA No. 575/Ahd/2019 for the Assessment year 2014-15 involving identical facts and circumstances vide order dated 17/06/2022 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 6. On the contrary, the Ld. DR before us vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that this tribunal in the case of Sardar Patel Co-operative Credit Society (Supra), involving identical facts and circumstances, has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the learned Counsel for the assessee, the assessment completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Act allowing the similar claim of the assessee for deduction under Section 80P(2) of the Act in respect of interest income earned on the deposits with Mehsana Urban Co-operative Bank was set aside by the same learned PCIT vide his order passed under Section 263 of the Act in the case of the People Co-op. Credit Society Ltd by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society (supra) and, on appeal by the assessee, the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal vide its order dated 21.02.2022 passed in ITA No.384/Ahd/2020 set aside the order passed by the learned PCIT under Section 263 of the Act restoring that of the Assessing Officer by relying inter alia on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of State Bank of India (supra). Copy of the said order of the Tribunal is also placed on record and perusal of the same shows that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal vide paragraph No.7 of its order as under:- "7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the entire details called for during the assessment proceedings were submitted by the assessee at the time of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act and the Assessing Officer was very well aware that section SOP claim was reflected in the details of tlic assessee. The assessee vide letter dated 22.05.2017 submitted the details regarding deduction under Section SOP of the Act which was claimed in the return of income which included in the interest income from Mehsann Urban Co-operative Bank. The PCIT has issued the show cause notice under Section 263 on 14.02.2020 on the very same issue which was verified by the Assessing Officer in Section 143(3) proceedings itself. Once the issue verified by the Assessing Officer and the jurisdictional Court has allowed the said claim related to interest income earned from Co-operative Bank, the PCIT cannot exercise Section 263 of the Act. Tlie Id. A.R. aptly relied upon the decision of State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 72 Taxmann.com 64 dated 25.04.2016. On the basis of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Totgars Co- ITA nos.120-121/AHD/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 4 operative Sales Society (supra), the PCIT cannot invoke provisions of section 263 of the Act. Thus, Section 263 does not sustain and appeal of the assessee is allowed." 5. The issue involved in the present case is thus squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of the People Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. (supra), wherein a similar issue involving identical facts and circumstances has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee and even the learned DR has not been able to dispute this position. We, therefore, follow the said decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal and set aside the impugned order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Act restoring that of the Assessing Officer passed under Section 143(3} of the Act. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7.1 Before us, no material has been placed on record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the decision of the Tribunal as discussed above has been set aside / stayed or overruled by the Higher Judicial Authorities. Before us, Revenue has not placed any material on record to point out any distinguishing feature in the facts of the case for the year under consideration and that of case referred above nor has placed any contrary binding decision in its support. Thus, respectfully following the above decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and the Co-ordinate Bench, we allow the ground of appeal of the assessee. 7.2 In the result, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. Coming to ITA No.121/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2017-18, an appeal by the assessee in the case of The Lunawada Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., 8. At the outset, we note that the issues raised by the assessee in its grounds of appeal are identical to the issues raised by the assessee in ITA No. 120/Ahd/2022 for the assessment year 2017-18. Therefore, the findings given in 120/Ahd/2022 shall also be applicable to the issue raised in the case of the assessee on hand. The appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No. 120/Ahd/2022 has been decided by us vide paragraph No.7 of this order in favour of the assessee. The learned AR and the DR also agreed that whatever will be the findings for ITA ITA nos.120-121/AHD/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 5 No. 120/Ahd/2022 shall also be applied in the present appeal i.e. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2022. Hence, the ground of appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed. 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 07/07/2023 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 07/07/2023 Manish
