9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1295X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been held to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and the same has been set-aside with directions to pass a fresh assessment order in order to examine assessee's entitlement for claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act. 2. In this appeal, the brief facts are that appellant is a Co-operative Credit Society formed by Solapur district secondary teachers/staff appointed by Government in Zilla Parishad Schools. The assessee co-operative society is registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and is engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. The appellant filed its return of income in Form No. ITR-V on 31.10.2007 for A.Y. 2007-08 assessment year 2007-08 whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Officer to make an assessment afresh and examine the assessee's entitlement of deduction u/s 80P of the Act in the light of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT, (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). The judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra) has been referred by the Commissioner for the proposition that the Assessing Officer cannot entertain a fresh claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act which was not made in the return of income, A.Y. 2007-08 without assessee having filed a revised return of income. Against the aforesaid decision of the Commissioner, assessee is in appeal before us. 4. In the proceedings before us, the learned counsel for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord. It's a trite law that jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act can be exercised by the Commissioner if two circumstances contained in A.Y. 2007-08 section 263 of the Act exist. The two circumstances which must exist in order to enable the Commissioner to invoke section 263 of the Act are, namely, (i) that the order in question should be erroneous; and, (ii) that by virtue of such error a prejudice is caused to the interests of the Revenue. It is also a well- settled proposition that the aforesaid two conditions must be cumulatively satisfied so as to enable the Commissioner to invoke section 263 of the Act. 8. In the present case, the case made out by the Commissioner is that in the return of income filed in Form No. ITR-V no deduction und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... buted to an error in the software, because on one hand the deduction under Chapter VIA A.Y. 2007-08 was not being reflected as a reduction from total income, whereas the total tax liability was worked out by the software at 'NIL', thereby indicating no taxable income. The learned counsel explained that the tax liability could not have been calculated by the software at 'NIL' if the total income declared at Rs. 1,46,37,696/- was not allowed exemption as per section 80P of the Act. This anomaly, according to the learned counsel, showed mal-functioning of the software, in terms of which the return of income was electronically uploaded. Apart therefrom, the learned counsel pointed out that even during the course of assessment pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Rs. 1,46,37,696/-, which "has been claimed exempt A.Y. 2007-08 under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and section 80P(2)(d) of the I.T. Act, 1961". A perusal of the assessment order does not indicate the absence of assessee's claim for exemption u/s 80P of the Act at the time of assessment proceedings. Moreover, we find that after the receipt of the return of income on 31.10.2007, the Assessing Officer has made an order-sheet noting dated 19.09.2008 in the assessment folder. In terms of such order-sheet noting, the case of the assessee has been selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was directed to be issued. The reason recorded by the Assessing Officer to select the case for scrutiny is "Dedcution claimed under cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also, in our view, not justified having regard to the material on record. In this context, A.Y. 2007-08 we find that in the course of assessment proceedings, assessee gave details of the incomes earned as also the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in its communication which is on record. Evidently, the claim of the assessee was allowed by the Assessing Officer after being satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, though the discussion in the assessment order is quite brief on the aspect. So however, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in the assessment order he has not made an elaborate discussion in this regard in terms of the parity of reasoning laid down by the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
