Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 448 - ITAT PUNEBenefit of deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(iii) - interest received by Co-operative Society from Co-operative Bank - AO was of the opinion that the activities carried on by the assessee are neither incidental nor ancillary to the marketing of agricultural produce of its members - HELD THAT:- We note that by placing reliance on the orders of this Tribunal in the case of Rena Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. [2022 (1) TMI 419 - ITAT PUNE] held that the interest received by Co-operative Society from Co-operative Bank is eligible for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find no evidence whatsoever produced by the assessee before us that the assessee is entitled to get deduction on the interest received from Co-operative Bank is eligible for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, having no evidence before us, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified. Thus, ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. Disallowance made on account of compound wall expenses - HELD THAT:- We note that the assessee did not submit any reply to the satisfaction of both the authorities below that a new compound wall erected at any place of the assessee’s business premises. CIT(A) confirmed the order of AO in the absence of any evidence. Therefore, having no evidence before us, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified. Thus, ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition made on account of furniture repair maintenance expenses - test of enduring nature applied to the purpose for which a particular expenditure is incurred is not a conclusive test - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) considering the facts and circumstances of the case clearly observed that no material evidence or explanation offered by the assessee against the finding given by the AO. We find no evidence in support of the claim of assessee were filed and in the absence of which we have no hesitation to confirm the order passed by the CIT(A). Therefore the order of CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO on account of furniture repair maintenance expenses is justified. Thus, ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is dismissed.
|