Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5625 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
05-01-2016
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
A
Assessment Year
2009-2010
Appeal Filed On
10-05-2013
Judgement Text
VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 520/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE ACIT CIRCLE- 6 JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHKARI MUNDRANALAYA LTD. G-1/138, MALVIYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, MALVIYA NAGAR, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AAAJR 0037 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 10/11/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 /01/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER T.R. MEENA, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR DATED 6-03-2013 FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2009-10 RAISING THEREIN GROUNDS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- (I) DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF AID OF RS. 12,210/- (II) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,97,000/- MADE O N ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF PAYMENT TO UNAPPROVED G ROUP GRATUITY SCHEME ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 2 (III) DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(I) OF RS. 50,000/- (IV) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,32,623/- MADE O N ACCOUNT OF LATE DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES PF CONTRIBUTI ON. (V) DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXEMPTION OF INTEREST OF RS. 22,89, 676/- U/S 80P(2 )(D) 2.1 THE GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING DE LETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF AID OF RS. 12,2 10/- TO KALYAN SAMITI WHEREIN THE AO DISALLOWED THE AID U/S 40A(9) STATIN G THAT IT WAS NOT OBLIGATORY FOR THE ASSESSEE UNDER ANY LAW TO GIVE A ID TO SAMITI. 2.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,210/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- AFTER GOING THROUGH RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT THR OUGH HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH A ORDER DATED 26-06-20 09 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IN ITA NO. 1190/JP/2008 I N A.Y. 2005-06. HON'BLE ITAT HELD THAT THE PAYMENT WAS FO R GENERAL WELFARE AND BENEFIT OF EMPLOYEES AND WAS DE DUCTIBLE U/S 37(1). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING HON'BLE ITAT ORD ER IN APPELLANTS OWN CASE IN A.Y. 2005-06, THE AO IS DIR ECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,210/- 2.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHEREIN THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 2.4 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS ITAT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2005-06 (SUPRA) PRAYING THEREIN TO DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE. ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 3 2.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD THA T THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR BEN CH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA). RESPE CTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA), WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3.1 THE GROUND NO. 2 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING DE LETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,97,000/- (CORRECT AMOUNT RS. 8,97,000/-) M ADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF PAYMENT TO UNAPPROVED GROUP INSURAN CE SCHEME WHEREIN THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE THAT ITS GROUP GRATUITY SCHEME WAS AN APPROVED GRAT UITY SCHEME AND THUS HE MADE A DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 8,97,000/- U/S 4 0A(7) OF THE ACT. 3.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,97,000 /- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- .IT IS SEEN THAT THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT THROUGH HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH A JA IPUR ORDER DATED 26-06-2009 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IN ITA NO. 1190/JP/2008 IN A.Y. 2005-06. HON'BLE ITAT HEL D THAT THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL WAS FILED BEFORE CIT B UT THE SAME HAD NOT BEEN APPROVED TILL DATE BUT AS THE ACT UAL PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TOWARDS NON-CONTRIBUTORY GROU P GRATUITY CUM LIFE INSURANCE SCHEME (WHICH IS FOR DE ATH- CUM-RETIREMENT GRATUITY BENEFITS FOR STAFF) THE SAI D PAYMENT ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 4 WAS HELD ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE U/S 36(1)(V). RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING HON'BLE ITAT ORDER IN THE APPELLANTS OW N CASE IN A.Y. 2005-06, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDI TION OF RS. 8,97,000/-. 3.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHEREIN THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3.4 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS ITAT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2005-06 (SUPRA) PRAYING THEREIN TO DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE. 3.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD THA T THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR BEN CH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA). RESPE CTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA), WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS GROUND NO. 2 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4.1 THE GROUND NO. 3 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING DE LETING THE ADDITION MADE BY DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(C)(I) OF RS. 50,000/- WHEREIN THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIM ED DEDUCTION OF RS. 1.00LAC IN ITS COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO JUSTIFY THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION BY THE AO. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE IS A CONSUMER COOPERA TIVE SOCIETY AND HENCE ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 5 THE DEDUCTION OF RS. 1.00 LAC HAS BEEN CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(I). THE AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 50,000/- WITH THE OBSERVATION THAT AS PER PROVISION CLAUSE (II) OF SECTION 80P(2) ( C), THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION OF ONLY RS. 50,000/-. THE EXC ESS AMOUNT WAS DISALLOWED BY THE AO AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 50,000/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- ..IT IS SEEN THAT THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT THROUGH HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH A JA IPUR DATED 26-06-2009 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IN IT A NO. 1190/JP/2008 IN A.Y. 2005-06. HON'BLE ITAT HELD TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS A CONSUMER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY SUPPLYIN G PRINTED MATERIAL TO GOVT. AND COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES LAND IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION OF RS. 1.00 LAC U/S 80P(2)(C )(I). R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING HON'BLE ITAT ORDER IN THE APPELLANTS OW N CASE IN A.Y. 2005-06, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDI TION OF RS. 50,000/-. 4.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHEREIN THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4.4 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS ITAT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2005-06 (SUPRA) PRAYING THEREIN TO DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE. 4.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD THA T THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR BEN CH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 6 CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA). RESPE CTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 (SUPRA), WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS GROUND NO. 3 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5.1 THE GROUND NO. 4 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING DE LETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,32,623/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LATE DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES PF CONTRIBUTION WHEREIN THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSES SEE DID NOT DEPOSIT THE EPF CONTRIBUTION WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIM IT FOR WHICH THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,32,623/-. 5.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 1, 32,62 3/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- AFTER GOING THROUGH RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE AMOUNT FOR THE MONTH OF DEC. 2008 REQUIRED TO B E DEPOSITED ON OR BEFORE 15-01-2009 WAS DEPOSITED ON 15-01- 2009 BUT THE CHEQUE WAS CLEARED ON 17-01-2009. THER E WAS IF ANY DELAY , IT WAS ONLY BY TWO DAYS. NO DISALLOW ANCE CAN BE MADE BECAUSE THE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN, THE RETURN WAS FILED WELL IN TIME ON 29-09-2009. IN VIEW OF THE AFOREMENTIONED, THE AO I S DIRECTED TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,32,623 /-. 5.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHEREIN THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 5.4 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) PRAYING THEREIN TO DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVEN UE. ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 7 5.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD TH AT THE AMOUNT FOR THE MONTH OF DEC. 2008 REQUIRED TO BE DEPOSITED ON OR B EFORE 15-01-2009 WAS DEPOSITED ON 15-01-2009 BUT THE CHEQUE WAS CLEA RED ON 17-01-2009. IN SUCH CASES, NO DISALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE BECAUSE THE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN A ND THE RETURN WAS FILED WELL IN TIME ON 29-09-2009. THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. SHRI AMIT BASU VIDE ORDER DATED 25-01-2012 ( ITA NO. 765/JP/2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09) HAS DELETED THE AD DITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF LATE DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES PF CON TRIBUTION. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE COORDINATE BENCH DECISIO N (SUPRA), WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS S USTAINED ON THIS ISSUE. THUS GROUND NO. 4 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6.1 THE GROUND NO. 5 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING DE LETING THE ADDITION MADE BY DISALLOWANCE OF EXEMPTION OF INTEREST OF RS . 22,89,676/- U/S 80P(2)(D). BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) AMOUNTING TO RS. 22,93,240/ -. THE SAID AMOUNT OF INTEREST COMPRISED OF RS. 22,89,876/- RECEIVED F ROM COOPERATIVE BANK AND RS. 3,364/- RECEIVED FROM COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. HOWEVER, THE AO DISALLOWED THE INTEREST CLAIM RECEIVED FROM COOPERA TIVE BANK OF RS. 22,89,876/- U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 8 6.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 22,89,67 6/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- AFTER GOING THROUGH RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, IT IS SEEN THAT SUCH EXEMPTION OF INTEREST INCOME CANNOT BE CLAIMED BY A COOPERATIVE BANK WHEREAS THE APPELLANT IS A COOPERA TIVE SOCIETY AND INTEREST RECEIVED BY IT IS EXEMPT U/S 8 0P(2)(D) OF I.T. ACT. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED ON THE SAME PO INT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN CASE OF CIT VS. HARYANA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS (1989) 180 ITR 631 (P&H) WH EREIN IT WAS HELD THAT INTEREST INCOME ON SHORT TERM CALL DEPOSITS IN ROHTAK CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. IN A.Y. 1974-7 5 AND 1975-76 QUALIFIED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D). IN V IEW OF THE AFOREMENTIONED, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 22,89,676/-. 6.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHEREIN THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 6.4 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) PRAYING THEREIN TO DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVEN UE. 6.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE ORDER OF T HE LD. CIT(A) THAT HE HAS TAKEN THE SUPPORT FROM THE JUDGEMNET OF HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HARYANA COOPERATI VE SUGAR MILLS (SUPRA) IN GIVING THE DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE. THE CRUX OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HARYANA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS (SUPRA) IS AS UNDER :- FOR THE REASONS RECORDED ABOVE, WE ANSWER BOTH THE ITA NO.520/JP/2013 ACIT, CIRCLE- 6,JAIPUR VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAH AKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. . 9 QUESTIONS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, IN THE AFFIRMA TIVE AND HOLD THAT THE TRIBUNAL WAS RIGHT IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SHORT TERM CALL DEPOSITS WERE INVESTMENTS WITHIN THE MEANING O F SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT AND QUALIFIED FOR DEDUCTION UN DER THAT PROVISION FOR BOTH THE YEARS IN QUESTION. THE PARTI ES ARE LEFT TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS. THUS, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE, GROUND NO. 5 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMIS SED. 7.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 /01/2 016. SD/- SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH VH-VKJ-EHUK (R.P.TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 05/01/2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHAKARI MUDRANALAYA LTD. , JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.520/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR
