TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hamim Yahya, Accountant Member Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri A.R. Ninawe ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(Appeals)-4, Nagpur dated 21-03-2016 and pertains to assessment year 2009-10. The grounds of appeal read as under : 1. That the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is incorrect and bad in law and against the natural justice. 2. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in treating the assessee as a co-operative bank u/s 80-P(4) instead of treating the assessee as a society providing credit facilities to its members. 3. The Assessing Officer erred in disallowing the claim u/s 80-P of ₹ 1784272-00 and disallowance of provision. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly to Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Banks in exclusion of all other financial institutions. Even the Apex Court has held that as long as there is no ambiguity in the statutory language, resort to any interpretative process to unfold the legislative intent becomes impermissible. The supposed intention of the Legislature cannot then be appealed to whittle down the statutory language which is otherwise unambiguous. If the intendment is not in the words, it is nowhere else. The need for interpretation arises when the words used in the statute are, in their own terms, ambivalent and do not manifest the intention of the Legislature. 7. Front the above discussion, it now becomes crystal clear without any scope for ambiguity tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Chhattisgarh Urban Credit Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit wherein the Tribunal held as under : 11 Upon careful consideration, we note that identical issue was the subject matter of consideration by ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench decision in the case of Dhanlaxmi Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. (supra), in which one of us, learned Judicial Member, was a party. The concluding portion of the Tribunal s decision is as under : 4. With this brief background, we have heard both the sides. It was explained that the Co-operative Society is maintaining operations funds and to meet any eventuality towards re-payment of deposit, the Co-operative Society is maintaining some liquidated funds as a short term deposit with the banks.This issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the fixed deposits made were to maintain liquidity and that there was no surplus funds with the assessee as attributed by the Revenue. However, in regard to the case before the Hon ble Supreme Court (On page 286) 7....... Before the assessing officer, it was argued by the assessee(s) that it had invested the funds on short term basis as the funds were not required immediately for business purposes and, consequently, such act of in vestment constituted a business activity by a prudent businessman; therefore, such interest income was liable to be taxed under section 28 and not under section 56 of the Act and, consequently, the assessee(s) was entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The argument was rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit facilities to its members and that the funds were of operational funds. The only fund available with the assessee was deposits from its members and, thus, there was no surplus funds as such; - in the case of Totgars, the Hon ble Supreme Court had not spelt out anything with regard to operational funds; 19.5. Considering the above facts, we find that there is force in the argument of the assessee that the assessee not a co-operative Bank, but its nature of business was coupled with banking with its members, as it accepts deposits from and lends the same to its members. To meet any eventuality, the assessee was required to maintain some liquid funds. That was why, it was submitted by the assessee that it had invested in sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sit the cooperative society is maintaining some liquidated funds as short term deposits with banks. Hence adhering to the doctrin stair desises, we hold that the assessee should be granted benefit of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). Accordingly, the interest on deposits would qualify for deduction under the said section. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. 7. Respectfully following the above precedent, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and hold that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 8. In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
