Vijaya Pathina Souhardha Sahakari Niyamitha, Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(2)(2), Bangalore

ITA 286/BANG/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2883 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2020
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 02-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R PREMI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Source of fund
• Section: 6; 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016 17 VIJAYA PATHINA SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA, NO.5, 4 TH FLOOR, NO.5 S.J ELEGANCE, INCOME TAX LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040. PAN AABAV 5040 R VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(2), BENGALURU. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANDEEP C, C.A RESPONDENT BY : SMT. R PREMI, JCIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 17-11-2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-11-2020 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 08/01/2020 PASSED BY LD.CIT (A)-3, BANGALORE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL: 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER INCO ME TAX (APPEALS), IN SO FAR IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF THE APPEL LANT, IS BAD AND ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. PAGE 2 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION OF RS. 64,40 ,358/- CLAIMED ULS. 80P(2)(A)(I) ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT IS NO T A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS REGISTERE D UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDHA ACT, 1997 THEREFORE, NOT A CO-OPERATIVE S OCIETY AND NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 4. THAT THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT ALLOWING THE INTEREST INCOME AS DEDUCTION ULS 80P(2 )(A)(I) OF THE ACT EVEN THOUGH THE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE OUT OF SURPLUS FUN D AND ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT. 5. THAT THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT ALLOWING THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.40,633/- EARNED FROM INVESTMENTS AS DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 6. THAT THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT ALLOWING THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM CO-OPERATI VE BANKS AS DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. 7. THAT THE LEARNED LOWER AUTHORITIES ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT ALLOWING EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR EARNING THE INTER EST INCOME FROM THE INVESTMENTS. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: 2. ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 06/09 /2016 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RUPEES NIL, AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION O F RS.64,40,358/-UNDER SECTION 80 P OF THE ACT. THE CA SE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY, AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143 (2) ALONG WITH NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) WAS ISSUED TO ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO STATUTORY NOTICES, REPRESENTATIVE OF ASSESSEE AP PEARED BEFORE LD.AO AND FILED REQUISITE DETAILS AS CALLED FOR. 3. LD.AO OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE , REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 6 (1) OF KARNATAKA SOUHARDHA CO-OPERA TIVE ACT 1997. LD.AO UPON VERIFYING THE DETAILS FILED NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS EARNED INTEREST INCOME OF RS.3,08,793/- FROM TH E PAGE 3 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 NATIONALIZED/CO-OPERATIVE BANKS, AND CLAIMED AS DE DUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P. LD.AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT ASSES SEE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE CLAIM UNDER SECTION 80 P (2) (D) O F THE ACT. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PR.CIT VS TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY REPORTED IN 395 ITR 611. 4. LD.AO ALSO NOTED THAT ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED A S CO-OPERATIVE UNDER KARNATAKA SOUHARDHA CO-OPERATIVE ACT 1997 AND NOT UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959. LD .AO THUS HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AN D HENCE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 8 0 P OF THE ACT. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF M/S.UDAYA SOUHARDHA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., DATED 17/08/2018. 5. LD.AO THUS DENIED, ENTIRE DEDUCTION CLAIMED B Y ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80 P AND ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED BY ORDER OF LD.AO, ASSESSEE PREFERRE D APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A). 7. LD.CIT(A) AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SUBMISSIONS F ILED BY ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. LD.CIT(A) UPHELD DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY ASSESSEE FROM NATIONALISED/OTHER CO-OPERATIVE BANKS BY HOLDING TH AT, DEDUCTION CAN ONLY BE ALLOWED TO CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REGIS TERED UNDER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT. HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON DECISION OF PAGE 4 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF M/S.UDAYA SOUHARDHA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., (SUPRA) . 8. LD.CIT(A) UPHELD DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION CLA IMED UNDER SECTION 80 P IN TOTO BY RELYING ON COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF M/S.UDAYA SOUHARDHA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., (SUPRA). 9. AGGRIEVED BY ORDER PASSED BY LD.CIT(A), ASSES SEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US NOW. 10. AT THE OUTSET LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT, ASSESSEE I S A CO- OPERATIVE AND NOT A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. AND THAT ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOUHARDHA CO-OPERATIVE A CT 1997. HE SUBMITTED THAT HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN IN CASE OF SWABHIMANA SOUHARDHA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD VS DCI T IN WP NO. 48414 OF 2018 BY ORDER DATED 16/01/2020 , HELD THAT, AN ENTITY REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOUHARDHA CO-OPERATIVE A CT 1997, FIT INTO THE DEFINITION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS DEFI NED UNDER SECTION 2 (19) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. REFERRING TO THE BY E LAWS OF ASSESSEE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT EVERY MEMBER SHALL H AVE ONE VOTE, IRRESPECTIVE OF NUMBER OF SHARES HELD BY THEM AND T HAT, ASSESSEE ONLY ADMITS REGULAR MEMBERS. LD.AR HOWEVER SUBMITT ED THAT, ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED EVEN UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPER ATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE CERTI FICATE PLACED AT PAGE 3 AND 4 OF PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US TODAY. 11. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM D EPOSITS MADE IN NATIONALISED/CO-OPERATIVE BANKS, LD.AR SUBMITTED TH AT THE ISSUE PAGE 5 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AFRESH, AS PREVIOUS DECISIO N IN CASE OF PR.CIT VS TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY REPORTE D IN 392 ITR 74 BY HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED IN THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION RELIED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW TO DENY ASSESSEES CLAIM. 12. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD.SR.DR PLACED RELIANCE ON ORDERS PASSED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. 13. WE HAVE PERUSED SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH SIDES IN LIGHT OF RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. 14. WE NOTE THAT, CERTIFICATES RELIED BY LD. AO PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED INTO BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED POSITION BY VIRTUE OF RATIO LAID DOWN BY HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SWABHIMANA SOUHARDHA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD VS DCIT (SUPRA) THAT, IT IS NOT A NECESSARY REQUIREMENT FOR ASSESSEE TO BE REGISTERED UNDER THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959 IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 P OF THE ACT. HOWEVER AS ASSESSEE IS ALS O REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959, TH ERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY OBJECTION LEFT IN RESPECT OF THE SAME BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. 15. AS REGARDS THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY ASSE SSEE FROM DEPOSITS MADE IN NATIONALISED/CO-OPERATIVE BANKS, D ISALLOWED BY LD. AO UNDER SECTION 80 P (2) (D) OF THE ACT, WE NO TE THAT THE SAME WAS DENIED AS ASSESSEE WAS NOT REGISTERED WITH KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959. LD. AO PLACED RELI ANCE ON PAGE 6 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF DCIT VS TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY (SUPRA). ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID DECISION WE NOTE THAT HONBLE COURT HAS HELD THAT I NTEREST ON INVESTMENTS RETAINED THE CHARACTER OF INCOME FROM O THER SOURCES AND THEREFORE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 P (2) (A) (I) OF THE ACT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE BECAUSE THE INCOME WAS NOT AT TRIBUTABLE TO BUSINESS OF PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO MEMBERS. HONBLE COURT THUS DENIED THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 P (2) (A ) (I) OF THE ACT. 16. LD.AR BEFORE US HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON FOLLOW ING DECISIONS BY COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL WHEREIN, THE ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO LD.AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION: NAGPUR CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY VS ITO IN ITA NO .2405/BANG/2019 BY ORDER DATED 31/08/2020; BANASHANKARI CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS ITO IN ITA NO. 2874/BE/2017 BY ORDER DATED 12/03/2018 17. THIS TRIBUNAL OBSERVED AS UNDER: 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND WE FIN D THAT THERE ARE CONTRARY JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATA KA ON THIS ISSUE. THIS ASPECT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE ITAT 'A' BENC H IN ITA NO.3389 & 3390IBANG/2019 IN THE CASE OF THE JAYANGAR CO-OPERA TIVE SOCIETY LTD. V. /TO, ORDER DATED 07.02.2020 WHEREIN THIS TRIBUNA L RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION WITH THE FOLLOWIN G OBSERVATIONS :- 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. FIRST OF ALL, WE REPRO& PARA 5 OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER CITED BY LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING BEEN RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S. THE JAYANAGAR CO-OPERA TIVE SOCIETY LTD., V. ITO (SUPRA). THIS PARA READS AS UNDER:- '5. WHILE LEARNED AR RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CRE DIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD., 230 TAXMAN 309 (KARN), THE DR RELIED ON A SUB SEQUENT DECISION OF THE HON'BIE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PCI T VS. TOTGARS CO- OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD., 395 ITR 611 (KARN.). W E HAVE CAREFULLY GONE PAGE 7 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 THROUGH THE SAID JUDGMENT. THE FACTS OF THE CASE BE FORE THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT WAS THAT THE HON'BLE COURT WAS CONSIDERING A CASE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2011-1 2. IN CASE DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF THE VER Y SAME ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSMENT YEARS INVOLVED WAS ASSESSMENT YEARS 1991 -92 TO 19992000. THE NATURE OF INTEREST INCOME FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS WAS IDENTICAL. THE BONE OF CONTENTION OF THE ASSESS EE IN AY 2007-08 TO 2011-12 WAS THAT THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2) OF THE ACT IS CLAIMED BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80 P(2)(D) OF THE ACT AND NOT UNDER SECTION 8OP(2)(A) OF THE ACT WHICH WA S THE CLAIM IN AY 1991-9 2 TO 1999- 2000. THE REASON GIVEN BY THE ASS ESSEE WAS THAT IN AY 2007-08 TO 2011-12 INVESTMENTS AND DEPOSITS AFTE R THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE TOTGAR'S CO-O PERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA), WERE SHIFTED FROM SCHEDULE BANKS TO C OOPERATIVE BANK. U/S.80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH ANY OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION OF THE W HOLE OF SUCH INTEREST OR DIVIDEND INCOME. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK IS ESSENTIALLY A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND THEREFORE DEDUCTION HAS TO BE ALLOWED UNDER CLAUSE (D) OF SEC. 80P(2) OF THE ACT. THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE S UPREME COURT IN THE TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALES SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) AND HELD THAT INTEREST EARNED FROM SCHEDULE BANK OR COOPERATIVE BANK IS AS SESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND THEREFORE THE PR OVISIONS OF SEC.80P(2)(D)OF THE ACT WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO SUCH INTEREST INCOME. IT IS THUS CLEAR THAT THE SOURCE OF FUNDS OUT OF WHICH IN VESTMENTS WERE MADE REMAINED THE SAME IN AY 2007-08 TO 2011-12 AND IN A Y 1991-92 TO 1999-2000 DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. THE REFORE WHETHER THE SOURCE OF FUNDS WERE ASSESSEES OWN FUNDS OR OUT OF LIABILITY WAS NOT SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNA TAKA HIGH COURT IN THE DECISION CITED BY THE LEARNED DR. TO THIS EXTENT TH E DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE LTD. (SUPRA) STILL HOLDS GOOD . HENCE, ON THIS ASPECT, THE ISSUE SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE AO FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER EXAMINING THE FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF THESE JUD GMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF THE TOTGARS CO-O PERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) AND OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RE NDERED IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA COOPERATIVE LTD. (SUPRA) .' 5. WE FIND THAT IN THAT CASE, THE MATTER WAS RESTOR ED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER EXAMI NING THE FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBIE APEX COURT IN THE C ASE OF THE TOTGARS CO- OPERATIVE SALES SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) AND OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CO-OPERAT IVE LTD. (SUPRA). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER, IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO. WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH DECISION, AFTER PAGE 8 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE IN THE LIGH T OF THESE TWO JUDGMENTS AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE.' 11. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KA RNATAKA IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT V. TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALES SOCIETY, 392 ITR 74 (KARN) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT ON INTEREST RECEIVED FROM INVESTMENTS MADE IN C O-OPERATIVE BANK. THIS DECISION WAS, HOWEVER, NOT FOLLOWED IN A SUBSE QUENT DB JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT V. TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE S SOCIETY, 395 ITR 611 [KARN]. IN THE LATER DECISION, THE HON'BLE HIGH COU RT HELD THAT INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON DEPOSITS WILL BE ASSESSED UNDER TH E HEAD INCOME FROM 'OTHER SOURCES' AND THEREFORE THE ENTIRE DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) OR 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 18. WE NOTE THAT, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE P RESENT CASE ARE SIMILAR AND IDENTICAL AND THEREFORE NEEDS TO BE RECONSIDERED BASED ON THE ABOVE REFERRED DECISIONS BY LD.AO. BEF ORE US, ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED THE DETAILS OF INTEREST E ARNED FROM NATIONALISED/CO-OPERATIVE BANKS. IN OUR VIEW THE IS SUE NEEDS TO BE REVISITED BY LD.AO FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER EXAM INING THE FACTS AND THE LIGHT OF DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF TUMKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD V S ITO , REPORTED IN 230 TAXMANN 309 , WHEREIN DECISION BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF TOTGARS CO-COPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD., REPORTED IN 322 ITR 283 HAS BEEN DULY CONSIDERED. THE LD.AR HAS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PR.CIT VS TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY REPORTED IN 392 ITR 74 CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL ALLOWING DEDU CTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT ON INTEREST RECE IVED ON INVESTMENTS MADE IN CO-OPERATIVE BANK. THIS DECISIO N WAS HOWEVER NOT FOLLOWED IN THE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT IN CASE OF PAGE 9 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 PR.CIT VS TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY REPORTED IN 395 ITR 611. 19. WE THEREFORE RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO LD.AO F OR FRESH CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DECISIONS AFTER PROVIDING ORDER QUIT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ASSESSEE IN ACCO RDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH NOV, 2020 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (BEENA PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 19 TH NOV, 2020. /VMS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE PAGE 10 OF 10 ITA NO.286/BANG/2020 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON ON DRAGON SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR -11-2020 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER -11-2020 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. -11-2020 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS -11-2020 SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON -11-2020 SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE -11-2020 SR.PS 8. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON -- SR.PS 9. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK -11-2020 SR.PS 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 11. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 12. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. 13. DRAFT DICTATION SHEETS ARE ATTACHED NO SR.PS