Shree Janseva Nagrik Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Vadodara V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 2746/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5777 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAURABH SINGH
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2746/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHREE JANSEVA NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., WADI TAD FALIA, WADI, VADODARA 390017 APPE LLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), VADODARA RESPONDENT PAN: AAAAS7771H & ITA NO. 2748/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHREE NIRAT NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., YAMUNA KUNJ WADI TAD FALIA, WADI, VADODARA 390017 APPE LLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), VADODARA RESPONDENT PAN: AAAAS6648H ITA NOS. 2746 TO 2750/AHD/16 [SHREE JANSEVA NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. & 3 ORS. VS. ITO ] A.Y. 2013- 14 - 2 - & ITA NO. 2749/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHREENATHJI CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, F-25/1, SAURABH VATIKA SOC., LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI MARG, OPP. SIDDHI VINAYAK SOC., O/S PANIGATE, VADODARA 390019 APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), VADODARA RESPONDENT PAN: AAAAS7147R & ITA NO. 2750/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHREE SHRAMJIVI NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., JAGGANATH HAVELI, NEAR WADI TOWER, VADODARA 390017 APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), VADODARA RESPONDENT PAN: AAAAS1934L ITA NOS. 2746 TO 2750/AHD/16 [SHREE JANSEVA NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. & 3 ORS. VS. ITO ] A.Y. 2013- 14 - 3 - / BY ASSESSEE : SHRI J. P. SHAH, A.R. NONE (IN ITA NO. 2750/AHD/2016) / BY REVENUE : SHRI SAURABH SINGH, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 27.03.2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.03.2018 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE FOUR ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 013-14 ARISE AGAINST THE CIT(A)-3, VADODARAS SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 12.08.20 16 (IN FIRST THREE APPEALS) & 30.08.2016 (IN LAST APPEAL), IN CASE NOS. CAB-3/422 /2015-16, CAB-3/424/2015-16, CAB-3/425/2015-16 AND CAB-3/426/2015-16, CONFIRMING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION DISALLOWING 80P(2)(A)(I) DEDUCTION(S) OF RS. 9,21,470/-, RS.45,80,490/-, 3,65,290/- AND RS.28,34,320/-; RESPECTIVELY, IN PRO CEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILES PERUSED. 2 . WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT ONE OF THE ASSESSEE SH REE SHRAMJIVI NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ALREADY STANDS ISSUED RPAD NO TICE. WE THUS ASSUME THAT THIS ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN SERVED THROUGH DUE PROCE SS. IT IS ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED EX PARTE. 3. WE NOW ADVERT TO SOLE SUBSTANTIVE COMMON ISSUE O N MERITS INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEES INTEREST INCOME IN QUESTION DERIVED FROM THEIR SURPLUS FUNDS PARKED IN A NATIONALIZED BANK I S ENTITLED FOR SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) DEDUCTION OR NOT. SUFFICE TO SAY, THIS QUESTION IS NO MORE RES INTEGRA AS PER HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS DECISION IN STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. CIT 389 ITR 578 (GUJ) DECIDING THE ISSUE IN REVENUES FAVOUR. LEAR NED COUNSEL REPRESENTING ASSESSEE FAILS TO PINPOINT ANY DISTINCTION ON FACTS OR LAW THEREIN. WE ACCORDINGLY AFFIRM THE CIT(A)S RESPECTIVE FINDINGS IN ALL THES E CASES AFFIRMING ASSESSING OFFICERS IDENTICAL ACTION DISALLOWING RESPECTIVE D EDUCTION CLAIMS IN PRINCIPLE. WE ITA NOS. 2746 TO 2750/AHD/16 [SHREE JANSEVA NAGRIK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. & 3 ORS. VS. ITO ] A.Y. 2013- 14 - 4 - FURTHER NOTICE THAT A CO-ORDINATE BENCHS ORDER IN ITA NO. 2710/AHD/2014 IN THE LADAL VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. VS. IT O DECIDED ON 08/09/2017 DIRECTS THAT ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-COMPUTE THE IM PUGNED DISALLOWANCE BY FOLLOWING NETTING PRINCIPLE. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IS FAIR ENOUGH IN NOT DRAWING ANY DISTINCTION HEREIN. WE THUS DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ALL THESE FOUR CASES TO FINALIZE A SIMILAR NETTING EXERCISE A S PER LAW. 4. THESE FOUR ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018.] SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 28/03/2018 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ! / CONCERNED CIT 4 !- / CIT (A) ( )* + ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1 + 23 4 5 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0