Shri Chhatrapati Sivaji Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Baroda V. The ACIT.,Circle-5, Baroda

ITA 2747/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 72828 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DK MISHR A
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL

Judgement Text

, , , , SMC, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, SMC BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' # ' !' # ' !' # ' !' # ' BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT ITA NO.2747/AHD/2012 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2009-2010] SHRI CHHATRAPATI SIVAJI SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. SHIVAJI CHOWK BARANPURA, VADODARA 390 001. /VS. ACIT, CIR.5 VADODARA. ( (( (%& %& %& %& / APPELLANT) ( (( ('(%& '(%& '(%& '(%& / RESPONDENT) )* + , #/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL . + , #/ REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K. MISHRA, SR.DR / + *01/ DATE OF HEARING : 10 TH DECEMBER, 2013 234 + *01/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-1-2014 #5 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V, BARODA DATED 30.10.2012. 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE APPEAL IS GROUN D NO.2, WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREINUNDER: 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.2,37,663/- CLAIMED U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE IT AC T 1961 IN RESPECT OF THE INCOME FROM BUSINESS OF PROVIDING CREDIT FAC ILITIES TO THE MEMBER BY THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. ITA NO.2747/AHD/2012 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED OVERDRAFT FACILITY ON ITS FIXED DEPOSITS W ITH THE BANK, AND THEREFORE, THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2) WAS A LLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. HE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, AHME DABAD IN ITO VS. M/S.JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., ITA NO.1491/AHD/2012 ORDER DATED 31.10.2012 IN SUPPORT OF HIS ARGUMENT. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS ARE NOT CLE AR AND THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE INCOME SHOULD BE ASSES SED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS. HE RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). I FIND THAT MATERIALS FACTS ARE NOT COMING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE AO. IT SHALL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE IN THE GROUND OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FIL E OF THE AO WITH DIRECTION TO FRAME DE NOVO ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PROVE ITS CONTENTIONS BY BRI NGING EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO. I DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT.