GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (7) TMI 327 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (7) TMI 327 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Reopening of assessment - disallowances of deduction claimed u/s.80P(2) - CIT(A) directing re-computing the total income after deduction u/s.80P of ₹ 10,81,712/- as against ₹ 50,04,034/- determined by the A.O - Held that:- The appellant had wrongly reduced the items of' Municipal Taxes pertaining to house properties as against adding it back. This would increase the income from business activity further by ₹ 56,400/-. Therefore the inco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1344132/- determined by him. Coming to the deductions claimed by the appellant in its revised computation before me, the deductions of ₹ 28,224/- u/s. 80P(2)(a)(iv), ₹ 50,000/- u/s. 80P(2)(c) and ₹ 395471/- u/s. 80P(2)(d) are held as admissible to the appellant. Its claim of deduction of ₹ 539379/- u/s. 80P(2)(iii) of the act in respect of vegetable commission is inadmissible as there was no profit from this activity. This activity has resulted in a loss which has wiped .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sion activity. The total deduction u/s. 80P of the act is admissible to the appellant is only ₹ 473695/- [ ₹ 28,224/- + ₹ 3,95,471/- + ₹ 50,000/-]. The total taxable income of the appellant which is gross total income less deduction u/s. 80P(2) of the act works out to ₹ 10,81,712/- [ ₹ 15,55,407/- ₹ 4,73,695/-). The total taxable income is determined at ₹ 1081710/-. The A.O. is directed to consider this as taxable income of the appellant

.....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV, Surat ( CIT(A) in short) dated 30/12/2010 pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2007-08. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- [1] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld.CIT(A), Surat has erred in re-computing the total income after deduction u/s.80P of ₹ 10,81,712/- as against ₹ 50,04,034/- determined by the A.O. after making disallowing on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat the order of the Ld.CIT(A)-IV, Surat may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was reopened for assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) was framed vide order dated 31/12/2009. While framing the assessment, the Assessing Officer (AO in short) made disallowance of deduction on various items claimed u/s.80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act. The AO made di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t. The ld.Sr.DR Shri B.L.Yadav vehemently argued that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the disallowances. He reiterated the submissions as were made in the statement of facts. He submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has not appreciated that the assessee has failed to explain the justification for claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act. 3.1. On the contrary, the ld.counsel for the assessee supported the order of the ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material availab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wherein he has simply considered profits from different ineligible activities as taxable income is incorrect. With a view to determine the correct income of the appellant, the accounts were perused which show that the appellant had claimed several capital expenses and made provisions and reserves in its accounts which were inadmissible and should have been disallowed for determining the gross total income of the appellant. It was further observed that income from CNG out let and petrol/diesel d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the act (procurement of agriculture implements for supplying them to its members). Similarly, income from premises given on rent to Bank of Baroda, M/s. Dhiraj Sons (Mega Stores) and Baroda Swarojgar Vikas Sansthan is also not eligible for deduction u/s. 80P of the act as it does not fulfill the criteria prescribed u/s. 80P(2)(e) and (f) of the act. 3.2. Based on the above the fresh computation of income of the appellant was done adding back the inadmissible expenses in the nature of building .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng bank) and 80P(2)(c) of ₹ 50,000/- and. 80P(2)(iv) of the act, ₹ 28,224/- (purchase and sales of fertilizers for members). No deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the act - sale of produce of members was available since this activity had resulted in loss to the appellant. The assessee was given a show cause in terms of provisions of section 251(2) of the Act as to why his income should not be determined in this way. The appellant was also required to show as to whether payment of provi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The deduction claimed under Chapter-VIA in this revised computation by the assessee amounting to ₹ 10,13,074/- comprises :- i) Agricultural implements for supply to members ₹ 28,224/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv). ii) Interest and dividend from other co-operative society ₹ 95,471/- u/s 80P(2)(d). iii) Marketing of Agricultural produce of members ₹ 5,39,379/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii). iv) Basic deduction ₹ 50,000/- u/s 80P(2)(c). Total... ₹ 10,13,074/- 5. It is seen from the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

back. This would increase the income from business activity further by ₹ 56,400/-. Therefore the income determined from its business and profession would be ₹ 77,598/- (Loss) as against loss of ₹ 2,88,873/- shown by the appellant [ - ₹ 2,88,873/- + Rs.l,54,875/- + ₹ 56,400/-]. The gross total income of the appellant would be higher by an amount of ₹ 211275/- than what has been shown by the appellant in its computation of income submitted in response to the sho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced Search


Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

21-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version