TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possibly done was to scrutinize the returns to find whether, having regard to the income derived under Section 56, the expenses claimed were extraordinary or seemingly disproportionate. In the present case, the very nature of the expenditure i.e. inextricability would, in the absence of any factual inquiry, lend credence to the assessee’s claim. Thus ITAT’s reasoning is sound and does not call any interference - Decided against revenue - ITA 148/2017 & CM Nos.5880-81/2017, ITA 151/2017 & CM Nos.5882-83/2017, ITA 152/2017 & CM Nos.5884-85/2017, ITA 153/2017 & CM Nos.5886-87/2017, ITA 155/2017 & CM Nos.5889-90/2017, ITA 156/2017 & CM Nos.5891-92/2017, ITA 157/2017 - - - Dated:- 15-2-2017 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. NAJMI WAZIRI JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n other Cooperative Societies. The assessee also had, in the normal course of its activities, deposited amounts in short term fixed deposits scheduled in other Banks which resulted in accrual of income. It is not in dispute that this income was assessed under Section 56 of the Act. However, the AO, and later the CIT (A), disallowed the expenditure claim, on the ground that no specific amounts could be attributed or shown by the assessee. Before the ITAT, it was contended that the respondent as a Thrift and Credit Society was engaged in dual business, which involved accepting deposits and saving them and at the same time investing them in different kinds of securities. Hence, the assessee could claim deduction in respect of that pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t which resulted in income from other sources are identical. This involves the collection, deposits and management of funds from the assessee s subscribers/members. In other words, the source is inextricable to the nature of the expenditure. In the circumstances, all that the AO could have possibly done was to scrutinize the returns to find whether, having regard to the income derived under Section 56, the expenses claimed were extraordinary or seemingly disproportionate. In the present case, the very nature of the expenditure i.e. inextricability would, in the absence of any factual inquiry, lend credence to the assessee s claim. 7. For these reasons, the ITAT s reasoning is sound and does not call any interference. The appeals alon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
