Shree Samgam Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit., Hukkeri V. Commissioner of Income Tax, Belgaum., Belgaum

ITA 263/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1447 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANAND S MARATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAVEEN P GH ALI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 263 /PNJ/201 5 (ASST. YEAR : 20 1 0 - 1 1 ) SHRI SANGAM SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT, HIDAKAL DAM, TALUK HUKKERI, DIST. BELGAUM. VS. CIT, BELGAUM. PAN NO. AAAAS 7256 D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRAVEEN P. GHALI - CA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ANAND S. MARATHE - D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 1 8/0 8 /2015. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 8/0 8 /2015. O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BEL A GA VI , DATED 2 6 /03/201 5 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 . 2. THIS APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 9 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDONATION APPLICATION REQUESTING FOR CONDON ING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE REASONS GIVEN FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL ARE REASONABLE HENCE, 2 ITA NO. 263 /PNJ/201 5 WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING . 3. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ERRED IN INITIATING THE REVISIONARY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 263 OF THE ACT. 4 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 1 5/ 1 0/20 1 0 DECLARING GROSS TOTAL INCOME AT 17,98,828/ - . THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SEC. 80P(2)(D) OF 17, 77,811/ - AND 21,107/ - UNDER SEC. 80P(2)( C ) OF THE ACT RESPECTIVELY. RETURN OF INCOME WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SEC. 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 27/12/2012 . THEREAFTER, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BY INVOKING HIS POWERS UNDER SEC. 263 OF THE ACT , ISSUED NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJ UDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE . A S PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ALLOWED DEDUCTION FROM ITS GROSS TOTAL INCOME IN RESPECT OF ANY INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY IT FROM INVESTMENTS WITH ANY OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY . FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEC. 80P DEDUCTION , COOPERATIVE BANK AND PCARD BANKS ARE EXCLUDED UNDER SUB - SECTION . HENCE, DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE 2(D) IS ALLOWABLE ONLY FOR INVESTMENT IN A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND NOT COOPERATIVE BANK. THE WHOLE INTEREST 3 ITA NO. 263 /PNJ/201 5 INCOME DERIVED BY A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS IN ANY OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IS DEDUCTIBLE UNDER SEC. 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO DO SO AND BRING THE SAME TO TAX BY DISALLOWING DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CONCLUDING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT. THUS, THERE WAS LACK OF VERIFICATION AND APPLICATION OF MIND ON FACTS AND LAW BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. BOTH THE PARTIES BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE NOW STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN I.T.A.NO. 174/PNJ/2014 DATED 08/06/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 , WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: - 10. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY US IN THE CASE OF THE GOA SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. VS. CIT IN I.T.A.NO . 44/PNJ/2013 VIDE ORDER DATED 08/06/2015 WHEREIN FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA VS. CIT, WE QUASHED THE 263 ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT. 11. FACTS AND ISSUES ARE BEING IDENTICAL, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING OUR OWN DECISION IN THE CASE OF THE GOA SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA), WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT AND RESTORE THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6 . FACTS BEING IDENTICAL RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 , WE ALLOW THE GROUND S OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE . 4 ITA NO. 263 /PNJ/201 5 7 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON TUESDAY , THE 1 8 TH DAY OF AUGUST , 201 5 AT GOA . S D / - S D / - (GEORGE MATHAN) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 1 8 TH AUGUST , 201 5 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE. 2 . THE REVENUE. 3 . THE CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R . 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI 5 ITA NO. 263 /PNJ/201 5 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 1 8 .0 8 .2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 19 .08 .2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 19 /08 /2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 1 9 /0 8 /2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 19 /08 /2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 /0 8 /2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 1 9 /08 /2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER