BHOOMI CLASSIC CO-OP HSG.SOC.LTD., MUMBAI V. ITO WARD-30(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 981/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case revolves around the dispute concerning the eligibility of Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg. Soc. Ltd. to claim a deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act for interest income earned from deposits with cooperative banks. The Assessing Officer initially disallowed the deduction, which was upheld by the CIT(A). However, the Tribunal, referencing various judicial precedents, overturned this decision, allowing the deduction and setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299903 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Pr. CIT v. Totagars Co-operative Society, Katlary Kariyana Merchant Sahakari Sarafi Mandali Ltd. vs. ACIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 143(1); 80P; 250; 143(2); 13; 2(19)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg. Soc. Ltd., CTS No. 1406, Link Road, Opp Sabkuch Market, Malad (West) Mumbai- 400064. बनाम/ Vs. ITO, Ward 30(1)(2) Room No. 436, 4 th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C- 43, G Block, BKC, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051. ा लेखा सं./ज आइआर सं./PAN/ GIR No. : AAA AB445 2G ( /Appellant) ( / Respondent) / Appellant by : Ms. NeelamJadhav.AR /Respondent by : Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR ुनव ई त ख / D a t e o f H e a r i n g 13/06/2023 घोषण त ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 14/06/2023 आद श / ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE - JM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A), Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in conf irming the disallowance of deduction u/s. 80P (2)(d) of Rs.13,63.498/- in respec t of interest earned f rom deposits kept in co-operative banks. Without appreciating that, co- operatives banks are registered under the Co-Operatives Societies Act, 1912 with a license to undertake banking 2 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai activities and theref ore Assessee is eligible to claimed deduction u/s.80P(2)(d). Theref ore, disallowance conf irmed by the NFAC may be deleted. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in not f ollo wing the Appellant's own case for AY 2013 2014 on identical f acts that the Honorable Tribunal has held that the appellant is eligible deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act which is binding on him, hence the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre may be set aside and the Assessing Officer may be directed to allo w the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 3. Without prejudice to above, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) relied on the case laws Pr. CIT v. Totagars Co- operative Society [2017] 395 ITR 611 (SC) which was considered by the Honorable tribunal and granted the relief , hence order of NFAC may be set aside and the Assessing Officer may be directed. 4. Without prejudice to above, the Judgment of Katlary Kariyana Merchant Sahakari Saraf i Mandali Ltd. vs. ACIT [2022] 140 taxmann.com 602 (Guj)(HC) relied by the NFAC is on the issue of reassessment and the Honorable Court has not decided on merit. Hence, the ratio cannot be applicable to the facts of the appellant. Theref ore, order of Tribunal f or earlier year may be followed and the order of NFAC may be set aside and direction may be given to the Assessing Officer to grant the relief u/s. 80P (2)(d) as claimed by the appellant. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal 2.The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a cooperative Housing Society. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2017-18 on 16.10.2017 disclosing a total income of Rs.13,94,040/- and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The Assessing 3 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai Officer (AO) found that the case was selected for limited scrutiny in respect of claim of deduction u/s VIA of the Act and the notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act was issued along with the questionnaire. In compliance to notice, the assessee has filed the information through e-assessment portal from time to time. The assessee being a cooperative society has disclosed income from house property of Rs.13,86,000/- and the society also has received the interest on deposits from various cooperative banks aggregating to Rs.13,63,498/- and claimed deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Whereas the AO has called for the various details and dealt on the facts with respect to the fixed deposits with the banks at Para 3.1 of the order and the assessee has submitted the reply to the show cause notice vide letter dated 24-10-2019 dealt at Para 4.1 of the order. Finally the AO was not satisfied with the explanations and information and has disallowed the claim of deduction U/sec 80P(2)(d) of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs. 28,07,540/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 26.11.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the A.O but has sustained the disallowance u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and granted relief in other grounds of appeal and partly allowed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the 4 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the A.O in treating the interest income from cooperative banks is ineligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The Ld.AR emphasized that the claim has to be allowed as the cooperative bank is treated as a cooperative society for eligibility of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and supported the submissions with the factual paper book and judicial decisions Contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A). 5. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole matrix of the disputed issue emphasized by the Ld.AR is in respect of granting of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act to the Cooperative Society. The Ld. AR submitted that the interest income derived by a co-operative society from its deposits with the co-operative banks would be entitled for deduction U/sec 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The co- operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act . Whereas the Coordinate Bench of the Honble Tribunal in the case of M/s Amore Commercial Premises Co-op Society Ltd vs. CPC Karnataka in ITA No. 2873 & 2874/Mum/2022 dated 17-01- 2023 has dealt on the taxability of interest earned on the 5 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai deposits with the Co-operative Banks at page 2 Para 3 of the order, which is read as under: 3. Brief ly stated f acts necessary f or consideration an adjudication of the issues at hand are :- Assessee being a Co- Operative Society has claimed disallo wance/deduction u/s. 80P (2)(d) in respect of the interest of Rs. 6,96,725/- f or parking its funds with Saraswat Co-Operative Bank, Sham Vithal Rao Co- Operative Bank and dis tric t cen tral CoOperative Bank. However, centralized processing centre (CPC)/ Assessing Officer has disallowed the deduction Claimed by the Assessee u/s 143(1). 4. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld.CIT(A) by way of filing Appeals who has conf irmed the addi tion by dismissing Appeals. Filling aggrieved Assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of f iling present Appeal. 5. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representative of the parties to the Appeals, perused the order passed by the Lo wer Revenue Authorities and documents available on record in the light of the law applicable thereto. 6. Undisputedly Assessee Society has invested is surplus f unds wi th Co-Operative banks and earned the interest income to the tune of Rs. 6,96,725/- and claimed it is deduction u/s. 80P (2)(d) of the Act, which has been disallowed by Assessing Officer & conf irmed by the Ld.CIT (A) by relying upon decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of principle Ld.CIT Vs. Totgar’s Co-Operative Sales Society Ltd. 7. Issue as to the allow-ability of the deduction claimed by the Assessee u/s. 80P (2)(d) of the Act, is no longer Res-Integra having being decided by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of Palm Court M Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. in ITA No.561/M/2021 order dated 09.09.2022 by settling the issue in f avour of the assessee by distinguishing the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, 188 Taxman 282(SC) and by discussing the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court wherein it is held that interest income 6 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai earned by the Co-operative Society on its investment made with co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act by returning f ollo wing f indings: "8. We have given a thoughtf ul consideration to the contentions advanced by the Id. Authorized representatives f or both the parties in context of the af oresaid issue under consideration. As stated by the ld. A.R, and rightly so, the issue that interest received by a co-operative society on its deposits with co-operative banks would be eligible f or deduction w/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is covered in assessee's f avour by orders of the various coordinate benches of the Tribunal in the f ollowing cases: (i). M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai, ITA No.3155/Mum/2019, dated 29.11.2019 (ii). Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum.) (iii). M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017. (iv). Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. V's. ITO-Range 20(2)(2), Mumbai (ITA NO. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017. (v). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society L td. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai. In the aforesaid orders, it has been held by the Tribunal that though the cooperative banks pursuant to the insertion of sub-section (4) to Sec. 80P of the Act would no more be entitled f or claim of deduc tion u/s 80P of the Act, but as a co-operative bank continues to be a co- operative society registered under the Co- operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912) or under any other la w for the time being in force in any State f or the registration of co- operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a cooperative society f rom its investments held with a co-operative bank would be entitled for claim of deduction w/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. We f ind that the af oresaid issue had exhaustively been looked into by the ITAT, "G" bench, Mumbai in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd, Vs. Pr.C IT-26, Mumbai ITA No.3155/Mum/2019, dated 29.11.2019, wherein the Tribunal had observed as under: "6. We have heard the authorized representatives f or both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought, f or adjudicating, as to whether the claim of the assessee for deduction under section. 7 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned from the investments/deposits made with the co-operative banks is in order, or not. In our considered vie w, the issue involved in the present appeal revolves around the adjudication of the scope and gamut of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P as had been made available on the statute, vide the Finance Act 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007. On a perusal of the order passed by the Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 of the Act, we f ind, that he was of the view that pursuant to insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, the assessee would no more be entitled f or claim of deduc tion under Sec. 80P(2) (d) in respect of the interest income that was earned on the amounts which were parked as investments/deposits with cooperative banks, other than a Primary Agricultural Credit Society or a Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. Observing, that the co- operative banks f rom where the assessee was in receipt of interest income were not co- operative societies, the Pr. CIT was of the vie w that the interest income earned on such investments/deposits would not be eligible for deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 7. Af ter necessary deliberations, we are unable to persuade ourselves to be in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT. Bef ore proceeding any f urther, we may herein reproduce the relevant extract of the af oresaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2) (d), as the same would have a strong bearing on the adjudication of the issue bef ore us. "80P(2) (d) (1). Where in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income ref erred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specif ied in subsection (2), in computing the total income of the assessee. (2). The sums ref erred to in sub-section (1) shall be the follo wing, namely:- (a)......................................................................................... ......... (b).................................................................. ......................................... (c).................................................................. .......................................... (d) in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society f rom its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income;" On a perusal of Sec. 80P(2)(d), it can safely be gathered that interest income derived by an assessee co-operative society 8 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai from its investments held with any other cooperative society shall be deducted in computing its total income. We may herein observe, that what is relevant f or claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) is that the in terest income should have been derived from the investments made by the assessee co- operative society wi th any other co-operative society. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT, that with the insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, vide the Finance Act, 2006, with eff ect from 01.04.2007, the provisions of Sec. 80P would no more be applicable in relation to any co-operative bank, other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. However, at the same time, we are unable to subscribe to his vie w that the af oresaid amendment would jeopardise the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of its interest income investments/deposits parked with a co- operative bank. In our considered view, as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a cooperative society f rom its investments made wi th any other co-operative society, the claim of deduction under the af oresaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d) would be duly available. We f ind that the term cooperative society" had been def ined under Sec. 2(19) of the Ac t, as under:- "(19) "Co- operative society" means a cooperative society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other la w f or the time being in f orce in any state f or the registration of cooperative societies;" We are of the considered view, that though the cooperative banks pursuant to the insertion of subsection (4) to Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P of the Act, but as a cooperative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co- operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other la w for the time being in force in any State f or the registration of co- operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a cooperative society f rom its investments held with a cooperative bank would be entitled f or claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2) (d) of the Act. 8. We shall no w advert to the judicial pronouncements that have been relied upon by the Id. A.R. We f ind that the issue that a co-operative society would be entitled f or claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income derived f rom its investments held wi th a cooperative bank is covered in f avour of 9 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai the assessee in the f ollo wing cases: (i) Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH $2 (Mum) (ii) M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017 (iii) Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO- Range-20(2)(2). Mumbai (ITA No. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017. (iv). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai. We further f ind that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. T otagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. C IT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible f or claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still f urther, we f ind that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P was that the co-operative banks which were functioning at par with other banks would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(4) of the Act. Insof ar the reliance placed by the Pr. CIT on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC) is concerned, we are of the considered view that the being distinguishable on f acts had wrongly been relied upon by him. The adjudication by the Hon"ble Apex Court in the af oresaid case was in context of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), and not on the entitlement of a cooperative society to wards deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) on the interes t income on the investments/deposits parked with a co-operative bank. Although, in all f airness, we may observe that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Totagars cooperative Sale Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Karn), had concluded that a co- operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d). At the same time, we find, that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had observed, that the interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investments held wi th a cooperative bank would be eligible f or 10 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We f ind that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in f avour of the assessee is to be pref erred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support f rom the af oresaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectf ully f ollow the view taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), wherein it was observed that the interes t income earned by a cooperative society on its investments held wi th a cooperative bank would be eligible f or claim of deduc tion under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Ac t. 9. Be that as it may, in our considered view, as the A.O while framing the assessment had taken a possible vie w, and therein concluded that the assessee would be en titled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) on the interest income earned on its investments/deposits with cooperative banks, therefore, the Pr. CIT was in error in exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 for dislodging the same. In f act, as observed by us hereinabove, the aforesaid view taken by the A.O at the time of framing of the assessment was clearly supported by the order of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum). Accordingly, f inding no justification on the part of the Pr. CIT, who in exercise of his powers under Sec. 263, had dislodged the view that was taken by the A.O as regards the eligibility of the assessee towards claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d), we "set aside" his order and restore the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3), date 14.09.2016." As the f acts and the issue involved in the present case bef ore us remains the same as were there bef ore the Tribunal in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. (supra), wherein the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s 263 of the Act was quashed, we, thus, respectf ully f ollo w the same. Backed by our af oresaid deliberations, we are unable to uphold the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the f ailure on the part of the A.O to be disallo w the assessee's claim f or deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) had rendered the 11 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai assessment order passed by him u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.08.2017 as erroneous in so f ar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 9. Accordingly, on the basis of our af oresaid observations, we herein not f inding f avor with the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3), dated 31.08.2017 was erroneous in so f ar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Sec. 263 of the Act set-aside the same and res tore the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.08.2017." 8. Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in case of Pr. CIT & Anr.Vs. Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (2017) 292 IT R 74 (Kar.) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) had held that interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investment held with cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 9. So f ollowing the decision rendered by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court (supra) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court (supra), we are of the considered view that assessee society who has earned an amount of Rs. Rs. 6,96,725/- f rom its investment of surplus f und wi th cooperative banks is entitled f or deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Resultantly, the Ld. C IT(A) has erred in upholding the denial of deduction by the AO to the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 6. Considering the facts, circumstances and the ratio of the judicial decisions. The Honble Tribunal has passed the order and relied on catena of judicial decisions were the co- operative society receives/earns interest on deposits with the co-operative bank is eligible for claim of deduction under section 80(2)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, fallow the judicial precedence, and set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct 12 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai the Assessing officer to allow the claim of deduction u/sec 80P(2)(d) of the Act on the interest income from the co- operative banks. And the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.06.2023. Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 14/06/2023 KRK, PS आदेश की ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. / The Appellant 2. / The Respondent. 3. ! ! " / The CIT(A) 4. ! ! "( ) / Concerned CIT 5. # $ ! , ! ! ण, मु瀓बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. $ %& ' / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु瀓बई मु瀓बईमु瀓बई मु瀓बई / ITAT, Mumbai 13 ITA No. 981/Mum/2023 Bhoomi Classic Co-op Hsg Soc. Ltd., Mumbai Date 1. Draft dictated on 13.06.2023 2. Draft placed before author 14.06.2023 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed