9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14 declaring taxable income of Rs. 90,790/-, after claiming deduction of Rs. 45,84,907/- under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The case was taken up for scrutiny for this Assessment Year and the assessment was concluded under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.12.2016, wherein the assessee's income was determined at Rs. 83,89,256/-; in view of the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowing the assessee's claim for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and bringing to tax in the assessee's hands the interest earned on FDs with Bank amounting to Rs. 82,98,469/- under the head "Income from Other Sources". On appeal, the CIT(A)-7, Bangalore, dismissed the assessee's appeal vide the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otally uncalled for and further failed to appreciate that the judgments relied on by him were distinguishable on the facts of the Appellant's case. 6. Without prejudice, the confirming the additions are excessive, arbitrary and unreasonable and ought to be deleted. 7. The learned CIT (A) erred in charging the interest u/s.234 A and 234B of the Act. 8. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed. 4. The issues that arise for consideration in this appeal by the assessee are as to whether the Revenue authorities were justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd., 395 ITR 611 (Karn.). We have carefully gone through the said judgment. The facts of the case before the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court was that the Hon'ble Court was considering a case relating to Assessment Years 2007-08 to 2011-12. In case decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the very same assessee, the Assessment Years involved was Assessment Years 1991-92 to 1999-2000. The nature of interest income for all the Assessment Years was identical. The bone of contention of the Assessee in AY 2007-08 to 2011-12 was that the deduction under Section 80P(2) of the Act is claimed by the respondent assessee under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act and not under Section 80P(2)(a) of the Act which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumukur Merchants Souharda Co-operative Ltd. (supra) still holds good. Hence, on this aspect, the issue should be restored back to the AO for a fresh decision after examining the facts in the light of these judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of The Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (supra) and of Hon'ble Karnataka high Court rendered in the case of Tumukur Merchants Souharda Co-operative Ltd. (supra). 6. The AO will afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and for filing details / evidence for the assessee to substantiate its case, before deciding the issue. 7. In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 is allowed fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
