TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... separate books of accounts were maintained for eligible/non-eligible activities. Thus, the CIT(A) has observed that the assessee had derived income from agricultural items sold to members was ₹ 56,88,446 (eligible for deduction u/s 80P and not disputed by AO. There was a loss of ₹ 40,93,683/- on the sale of agricultural & non-agri. items to the Members & Non-members so deduction u/s. 80P does not apply, but the basis of above finding of the CIT(A) is not clear from his order. In the above circumstances, in our considered view, it shall be in the interest of justice to restore the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification and thereafter adjudicating the issue afresh by passing a speaking order. We, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny and thereafter the assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide order dated 22.12.2010 and the total income was determined at ₹ 29,72,680/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 26.08.2011 decided the issue in favour of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of ld. CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), Valsad, without appreciating the facts, has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 45,67,085/- in respect of Administrative managerial expenses related to non-agricultural activities by directing not to apply the Rule of 3, though ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g composite accounts for exempt income as well as non exempt income. He was therefore of the view that provisions of Section 14A to be applicable. He therefore following Rule of 3, provision of Section 14A and the ratio of the decisions of High Courts, cited in his order reworked the deduction. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who following the order in Assessee s own case for A.Y. 2007-08 deleted the addition by holding as under:- 4.3 Decision:- I have carefully perused the facts of the case and the observation made by the A.O in the assessment order. I have also perused the submissions made by the A.R. of the appellant. The facts and circumstances for this Asstt. Year are identical with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, the total administrative expenses and interest expenses are to be apportioned in respect of the said activities to ascertain the income from the activities which are exempt u/s 80P of the Act; whereas the CIT(A) observed that separate books of accounts were maintained by the assessee in respect of activities from which income derived was exempt u/s 80P of the Act and in respect of non-eligible activities. We find that none of the lower authorities have stated that they have verified the books of accounts actually maintained by the assessee. From the assessment order, it appears that the Assessing Officer has concluded that separate books of accounts were not maintained and on the basis that one trading account and one P L account wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horities on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the issue as per law after proper verification and after allowing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, ground no. 1 of appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. Since the facts of the case in the year under appeal are identical to that of A.Y. 2007-08, we therefore respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench for A.Y. 2007-08 and for similar reasons and with similar directions restore the issue back to the file of A.O. Thus the ground of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in Open Court on 04 - 09 - 2015. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
