ITO 15(1)(1), MUMBAI V. GOVERNMENT PRINTING PUBLICATION & STATIONERY DEPARTMENT CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5030/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93332 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S T BIDARI SR
• Section: 143(3); 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCO ME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 5030/M/2013 (AY:2010 - 2011 ) INCOME TAX OFFICER 15(1)(1), R.NO. 119, MATRU MANDIR, 1 ST FLOOR, TARDEO ROAD, MUMBAI - 07. / VS. GOVT. CENTRAL PRINTING PRESS, NETAJI SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSS MARG, CHARNI ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 004. ./ PAN : AAAAG1547M ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.T. BIDARI, SR. AR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA / DATE OF HEARING : 13.07.2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 .07.2015 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 03.07.2013 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 26, MUMBAI DATED 30.04.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011. IN THIS APPEAL, REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN DIRECTING TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S 80P TO THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH ASSESSEE CARRIES ON THE BANKING BUSINESS AND OTHER BUSINESS IN THE NAME OF A CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. 2. ON T HE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) WITHOUT CONSIDERING INSERTION OF SECTION 80P(4) AND SUB CLAUSE (VIIA) TO SECTION 2(24) VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2006 W.E.F. 1.4.2007. 3. ON T HE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE ARE NOT IDENTICAL WITH ANY OF THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE AO ESPECIALLY DECISION OF ITAT JAIPUR IN THE CASE OF KEKRI SA HAKARI BHUMI VIKAS BANK LTD AND COCHIN ITAT IN THE CASE OF KERALA STATE COOP. AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING HIS OWN ORDER IN THE CASE OF VISHAL JANSEVA SAHAKARI PATSANTHA LTD FOR AY 2008 - 2009 ON THE SAME ISSUE VIDE ORDER NO. CIT (A) - 26/IT - 30/15(3)(3)/10 - 11, DATED 4 TH JULY, 2012. 2. BRIEFLY STATED RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. NIL AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS. 40,13,467/ - . THE CASE WAS SCRUTINIZED UNDER CASS AND THE NOTICES U/S 143(1) & 143(2) WERE ISSUED AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 2 143(3) OF THE ACT DETERMINING T HE ASSESSED INCOME AT RS. 40,13,470/ - WHEREIN THE AO DISALLOWED RS. 40,13,467/ - AGAINST THE SAID CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, CIT (A) ALLOWE D THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAID DECISION OF THE CIT (A), REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE ABOVE MENTIONED GROUNDS. 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO GROUND NO.1 , WHICH IS THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND TO BE ADJUDICATED, AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)( A)(I) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS COOPERATIVE BANK. ON APPEAL, CIT (A) GRANTED RELIEF AS PER THE DISCUSSION GIVEN IN PARA 3.2 AND 3.2.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAME REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED VARIOUS ORDERS OF THE ITAT, MUMBAI AS WELL AS THE OTHER BENCHES AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF QUEPEM URBAN COOPERATIVE CRED IT SOCIETY LTD [2015 ] 58 TAXMANN.COM 113 ( BOMBAY) . 5. AFTER HEARING THE BOTH THE PARTIES IN THIS REGARD, WE FIND THE SAID JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF QUEPEM URBAND COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD (SUPRA) IS RELEVANT FOR THE FOLLOWING PROPOSITION: WHERE ASSESSEE - COOPERATIVE SOCIETY COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS CO - OPERATIVE BANK ON, MERE FACT THAT AN INSIGNIFICANT PROPOSITION OF REVENUE WAS COMING FROM NON - MEMBERS, AND THUS, WAS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 6. THEREFORE, CO NSIDERING THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE CIT (A) IS FAIR AND REASONABLE AND IT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. REST OF THE GROUND S IE GROUND NO.2, 3 AND 4 AR E ARGUMENTATIVE IN NATURE AND THEREFORE, THEY NEED NO SPECIAL ADJUDICATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED AS ACADEMIC . 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JULY, 2015. SD/ - SD/ - (AMIT SHUKLA) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 29 .7 .2015 3 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI