TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to both sides - Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.774(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) - - - Dated:- 28-6-2019 - Shri A.K.Garodia, Accountant Member And Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member Appellant by: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, Advocate Revenue by: Smt H.L.Soumya Achar, Addl.CIT ORDER Beena Pillai, Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 22-032019 passed by Ld. CIT (A), Mangaluru for assessment year 2016-07 on following grounds;. Concise Grounds of Appeal The Appellant above named begs to submit as follows in addition to such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing 1) The impugned order of both the below authorities are not speaking orders. The impugned orders have been passed mechanically, without application of mind and not sustainable in law. 2) It is submitted that only the Co-operative banks other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary cooperative agricultural and rural development bank have lost exemption available under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to any one or more of such activities'. The Appellant being a credit cooperative society, its entire interest income derived from its investments made with co-operative societies/ co-op. banks and commercial banks is attributable to its business and happen to be an integral part of its business income and qualifies for deduction u/s. 80 P of the Act as held in - hA 29/2015 - Ctittigedarara Credit Co-op. Society Ltd. Mysore Vs. ITO, Mysore. The action of the Respond.mt in allowing only a sum of ₹ 24,53,889/- as deduction u/s. 80 P of the Act as against the total interest derived of ₹ 31,12,708/- and taxing the balance interest of ₹ 6,58,819/- received from Commercial and Coop. Banks is not only opposed to law but also contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in ITA 29/2015 stated supra. 5) The Respondent was at fault in relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Hyderabad Vs. ACIT, Circle-9(1), Hyderabad in Civil Appeal No. 10245 of 2017 dated 08.08.2017 for taxing the appellant on the ground that the appellant was transacting with associate members and nominal members. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of full exemption u/s. 80P of the Act to the Appellant is illegal, improper, unjustifiable and as such the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. .. 8) Both the below authorities have failed to observe that there is no condition precedent as to the fulfillment of 'concept of mutuality' for allowing deduction under Sec. 80 P of the Act to co-operative societies. The judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Hyderabad' supra has been misread, misunderstood and misinterpreted by both the below authorities for the purpose of taxing the appellant on the ground that the concept of mutuality is missing in appellant society. The action of both the below authorities amounted to carving out a separate exclusion, which will not fall in their domain, to deprive the legitimate benefit of exemption available to the appellant u/s. 80P of the Act. 9) The Appellant disputes the disallowance of various provisions of ₹ 5,70,164/- made in the Profit Loss A/c of the appellant as unascertained liability and its consequent addition to the Business income by the Respondent in his impugned order. The Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is not applicable and instead of that, another judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. Vs. ITO as reported in 230 Taxman 309 is applicable. At this juncture, this proposition was put forward by the bench that under similar facts, the Tribunal is restoring the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh decision after examining the facts of the present case in the light of these two judgments rendered in the case of PCIT and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra) and Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra) with the direction that if the facts are in line with the facts in the case of PCIT and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra), then the issue should be decided against the assessee. But if the facts of the present case are in line with the facts in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra), then the issue should be decided in favour of the assessee. The bench pointed out that in the case of PCIT and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra), the amount deposited in bank on which interest inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
