M/s Punjab State Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., Chandigarh V. ITO, Chandigarh

MA 59/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6152 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 17-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NOS. 59& 60/CHD/2009 (IN ITA NOS. 420/CHD/2007 & 454/CHD/2008) ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03 & 2005-06 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE VS. THE ITO, WARD-4(3 ), MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD. CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AAAAP-1208Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.R.SHARMA RESPONDENT BY: SMT. SARITA KUMARI ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATIONS MOVED BY THE APPLICA NT ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.1.2010 IN ITA NO S. 420 & 454/CHD/2007 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 & 2005-06. MA NO. 59/CHD/10 IN ITA 420/CHD/2007 2. THE APPLICANT ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL TO THE EXTENT THAT IN THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL, TWO ISSUES WERE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 ONE RELATING TO THE DISPUTE IN CONNECTION WITH ELIGIBLE DEDUCTION ALLOW ABLE TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80 P(2)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND THE SECOND BEI NG GROUND NO.2 IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S 80P(2)( A)(IV) OF THE ACT. 2 3. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT WHI LE DECIDING THE APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 29.1.2010 HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE IN CONNECTION WITH DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT AND SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HO WEVER, NO ADJUDICATION WAS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U /S 80P(2)(A)(IV) OF THE ACT. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ORDER DATED 29.1. 2010, WE FIND AN ERROR TO HAVE CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA N O. 420/CHD/2007 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 UNDER WHICH THE GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN CONNECTION WITH THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW U/S 80P (2)(A)(IV) HAS NOT BEEN A DJUDICATED UPON BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER DATED 29.1.2010. ACCORDINGLY , WE RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 29.1.2010 TO THE LIMITED EXTENT OF ADJUDICATI NG THE GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.. 420/CHD/2007 REL ATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE ORDER DATED 29.1.2010 RELATING TO THE DECISION ON THE ISSUE OF GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) IS NOT DI STURBED. ACCORDINGLY, THE MISC. APPLICATION MOVED BY THE APPLICANT ASSESS EE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IS RECALLED TO THE EXTENT A S INDICATED ABOVE. MA NO. 60/CHD/10 IN ITA 454/CHD/2008 4. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED ANOTHER MISC. APPLIC ATION AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.1.2010 IN ITA NO. 454/CHD/2008 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 5. THE APPLICANT IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL TO THE EXTENT THAT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE CONNECTING WITH THE ELIGIBLE DEDUCTION AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P(2)(D), THE TRIBUN AL HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 14.3.2008. THE PLEA OF T HE APPLICANT IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAD DECIDED THE ISSUES OTHER THAN THE GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 3 80P(2)(D) AND ONLY AGAINST THE DENIAL OF THE DEDUCT ION U/S 80P(2)(D) , AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND NO APPEAL WAS MOVED IN CONNECTION WITH OTHER GROUNDS ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A ) AND THE TRIBUNAL BY AN ERROR HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN T OTALITY AND THE SAME NEEDS TO BE MODIFIED IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES. THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE TRIBUNAL VIDE PARA 7 HAS SET A SIDE ONLY THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE RE-COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. THE SAID SETTING ASIDE WAS I N CONNECTION WITH THE APPEAL RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 AND THE SAID RATIO HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO THE APPLIED IN THE OTHER TWO YEARS RELA TING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED OUR ORDER DATED 29.1.2010. THE ISSUE ADDRESSED BY THE TRIBUNAL REL ATING TO THE COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION PERMISSIBLE TO THE ASSESSE E U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND THREE APPEALS RELATING TO ASSESS MENT YEARS 2002-03, 2005-06 AND 2006-07 INVOLVING SAME ISSUE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND WERE DISPOSED OF BY THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 29.1.20 10. WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE, THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 7 HAS SET ASIDE THE ORD ER OF CIT(A) AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REWORK THE INTERE ST EXPENSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EARNING OF INTEREST INCOME FROM THE MEMBER C O-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, AS ABOVE. SECONDLY, WITH REGARD TO THE ALLOCATION OF HEAD OFF ICE EXPENSE ALSO, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO APPLY THE SAME BASI S. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSING OFFI CER IS DIRECTED TO RE- COMPUTE THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION ELIGIBLE TO THE ASS ESSEE U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT ACCORDINGLY . 7. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE PARA 9 HAD FURTHER HELD AS UND ER:- 4 THE OTHER TWO CAPTIONED APPEALS IN ITA NO. 454/CHD /2008 AND ITA NO. 437/CHD/2009 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT Y EARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 RESPECTIVELY INVOLVE IDENTICAL ISSUE AS DECIDED IN ITA NO. 420/CHD/2007 (SUPRA) IN THE FORE GOING PARAGRAPHS. OUR DECISION IN THE APPEAL FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 APPLIES MUTATIS MUTANDIS IN THE OTHER TWO APPEALS ALSO. 8. FROM THE PERUSAL OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FI ND NO INFIRMITY IN THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DAT ED 29.1.2010 UNDER WHICH WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 420/CHD/ 2007 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS DIRECTED TO RE- COMPUTE THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION ELIGIBLE TO THE ASS ESSEE U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, IN LINE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL . FURTHER, AS IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS RAISED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2006-07, THE DECISION IN APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 WAS DIRECTED TO BE APPLIED MUTATIS- MUTANDIS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND 2006-07. W E FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL AND DISMISS THE MISC. APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 9. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IN MA NO. 59/CHD/2010 IS ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE AND M.A. NO. 60/CHD/2091 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 RKK 5 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR