TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11-5-2016 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri V. N. Purohit, FCA For the Respondent : Shri Rajat Kr. Kurel, JCIT, DR ORDER Per Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member This appeal filed by assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXVI, Kolkata dated 18.05.2010. Assessment was framed by DCIT, Circle-1, Hooghly u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) vide his order dated 07.12.2007 for assessment year 2005- 06. Grounds raised by assessee are reproduced below:- 1) That CIT(A) has erred in holding while disposing ground No.1 (as reproduced below) that assessment order does not suffer any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppearing on behalf of Revenue. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR did not press for ground No.3 4 and same stand dismissed as not pressed. 3. The common issue raised by assessee in ground No.1 2 is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving relief to the assessee u/s 80P of the Act. 3.1 Facts in brief are that assessee is a Co-operative Society registered under the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and engaged in distribution of agricultural related materials. During the first appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(A) noticed that assessee had claimed deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on the following interest income. a) From Banks Rs. Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral produce of its members, or (vi) the collective disposal of the labour of its members, or (vii) fishing or allied activities, that is to say, the catching, curing, processing, preserving, storing or marketing of fish or the purchase of materials and equipment in connection therewith for the purpose of supplying them to its members, the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities : The CIT(A) treated the interest income as income from other sources and accordingly denied the benefit of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act without adducing any reason thereon. According to the assessee, it was giving loans to agriculturists who are members of the society. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7.1.We further find that the issue involved is covered in favour of the assesee by catena of decisions of the Tribunal in assessee s own case. These decisions are also affirmed by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in its order for A.Yr.2005-06. In this order the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court has considered all the relevant orders and has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. We may gainfully reproduce the operative order of the Jurisdictional High Court which is as under :- We have gone through the impugned judgment and order of the Learned Tribunal. It appears that the point involved .is whether interest earned out of the investment earned by the assessee cooperative can be treated to be the income arising out o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nge in the facts and circumstances of this case and it was held that the assessee was eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on interest on investment amounting to ₹ 1,18,07,645/- in this assessment year also. Since the Tribunal found that this decision of the Tribunal was followed by CIT(A) there is no reason to take a different view. Under these circumstances, we feel that when the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) as well as the Tribunal has followed the earlier unchallenged decision no question of law is involved in this matter. Nothing has been produced before us to show subsequent decision of the Tribunal in relation to the assessment years 1998-99 to 2002-03 and 2003-04 have been challenged by any of the parties b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (supra) we find that the said decision is not applicable in the facts of the case. We find that the Hon ble Apex Court in the said decision in para 11 has itself mentioned that We are confining the judgment to the facts of the present case . The facts of the case were that assessee s business was to provide credit facilities to its members and to market their agricultural produce. In many cases assessee retained sale proceeds of members whose produce was marketed by it and since funds created by such retention were not required immediately for business purposes, it invested same in specified securities and earned interest income. In these circumstances the Hon ble Apex Court had held that interest earned wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
