ITO WARD 5, PONDICHERRY V. MS/ CENTRAL CO OP PROCESSING SUPPLY AND MARKETING SOCIETY LTD, PONDICHERY

ITA 418/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1053 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIJAYAPRABHA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.418/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, D.P. THOTTAM, MUTHIALPET, PUDUCHERRY 605 003. V. M/S THE CENTRAL CO-OP. PROCESSING SUPPLY AND MARKETING SOCIETY LTD., INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THATTANCHAVADI, PONDICHERRY 605 009. PAN : AAAAT 0073 F (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, JCIT -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : NONE 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 13.08.2018 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.09.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PUDUCHERR Y, DATED 02.11.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2 I.T.A. NO.418/CHNY/18 2. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERV ICE OF NOTICE BY RPAD. THEREFORE, WE HEARD THE LD. DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 3. MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRES ENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT ' THE ACT') BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF TH E ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN ALLOW ONLY 50,000/-. HOWEVER, THE CIT(APPEALS) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE UNDE R SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF THE ACT. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE-CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS TRADING IN AGRICUL TURAL COMMODITIES, THEREFORE, NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF THE ACT. 4. WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF TH E ACT. SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF THE ACT CLEARLY SAYS THAT MARKETING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE GROWN BY THE MEMBERS OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SO CIETY IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(III) OF THE ACT. IN THIS 3 I.T.A. NO.418/CHNY/18 CASE, THE ASSESSEE-CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS MARKETIN G AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES, THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTL Y ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS NON-D EDUCTION OF TAX IN RESPECT OF INTEREST PAID TO M/S PONDICHERRY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD. 6. WE HEARD MS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA, THE LD. DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE. ADMITTEDLY, M/S PONDICHERRY INDUST RIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD. WAS EST ABLISHED BY GOVERNMENT OF PONDICHERRY. THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPE ALS) HAS RIGHTLY FOUND THAT THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO THE C OMPANY ESTABLISHED BY GOVERNMENT IS NOT SUBJECTED TO TDS. THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRM ED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. 4 I.T.A. NO.418/CHNY/18 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. KRI. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A), PUDUCHERRY 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, PUDUCHERRY 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ( ; /GF.