Sahyadri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Kolhapur V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1., Kolhapur

ITA 676/PUN/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0822 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.676/PUN/2021 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sahyadri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., At Post Dhamod, Radhanagari, Kolhapur – 416211 Maharashtra PAN : AAAAS9803L Vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Kolhapur (Appellant) (Respondent) आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM : This assessee’s appeal for AY 2016-17 arises against the CIT(A)-1, Kolhapur’s order dated 16-01-2020 passed in case No. KOP/10408/2018-19 involving proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the Act. Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex parte. 2. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the lower authorities action disallowing its 80P(2)(d) deduction claim of Rs.33,56,546/- in the course of assessment dt. 14-12-2018 as upheld in the CIT(A)’s order. Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing 26-05-2022 Date of pronouncement 30-05-2022 ITA No. 676/PUN/2021 Sahyadri Sah. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., 2 3. I have given my thoughtful consideration to Revenue’s vehement contentions supporting the impugned disallowance and find no merit therein. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has derived the impugned interest income from its deposits with cooperative bank which has been held as not eligible for the impugned deduction in light of Sec.80P(4) of the Act. The Revenue’s case is that this statutory provision does not apply in an instance of a cooperative bank. I observe that the same only bars a cooperative bank from claiming the impugned deduction itself rather than a cooperative society deriving interest income from its deposits made in such an institution. Coupled with this, case law in State Bank of India Vs.CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) and CIT Vs. Totagar Cooperative Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Kar.) already decides the instant issue in assessee’s favour and against the department thereby holding that interest income derived from a cooperative bank is indeed allowable as Sec.80P deduction. I accordingly delete the impugned disallowance in very terms. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30 th May, 2022. Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 30 th May, 2022 Satish/Doc ITA No. 676/PUN/2021 Sahyadri Sah. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., 3 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. The CIT(A)-1, Kolhapur 4. 5. The Pr.CIT-1, Kolhapur वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील!य अ धकरण, प ु णे “SMC” / DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 26-05-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 27-05-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member -- JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. -- JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order.