9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . That, the learned CIT(A) has committed a serious error in not allowing the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as "the Act‟) read with section 80P(4) of the Act as the appellant is a primary Agricultural Credit Society. 3. That, the learned CIT (A) has committed serious error in not quashing the order of assessment passed by the learned Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act which has been passed without processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act within one year from the end of the financial year in which the return has been filed. 4. That, the learned CIT (A) has committed a serious error in not quashing the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act which is based on the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act issued on an extraneous reason and without any application of mind of the learned Assessing Officer as provided under the Act. 5. That, the learned CIT (A) has erred both in law and in fact by not allowing the provision for NPA on mercantile basis as has been claimed by the appellant which is bad debts and for that matter the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer of ₹ 23,86,48,201 and confirmed by the lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved in the matter. Therefore, he contended that the orders passed by the lower authorities are unsustainable for legal scrutiny and accordingly sought for allowing the appeal of the assessee. 7. Contrary to this, the learned DR has vehemently argued supporting the orders passed by the assessing authorities contended that for every issue, the lower authorities have referred to the concerned provisions of law as well as the decisions rendered by the superior forums on the aspects and basing on them only they have passed the impugned orders. In that view of the matter, the orders passed by the lower authorities are not infirmed in any way requiring interference. Hence, the learned DR sought for upholding the same by dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. 8. On careful analysis of the orders passed by the lower authorities, we find that the learned CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue raised by the assessee with regard to the issue of availability of opportunity u/s.80P(4) of the I.T.Act, in view of the assessee being a primary agricultural credit society. This issue was answered by the learned CIT(A) from paragraph 6.1 onwards in his order, wherein he observe as to what are the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ociety with its members shall be included in the definition of "income‟. There afterwards the learned CIT(A) has considered the decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd (AIR 1991 SC 2049) and the decision of Hon‟ble Andhra Pradesh High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Anakapalli Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd., [(2000) 245 ITR 616 (AP)], wherein it was held that the provisions relating to concessions are ordinarily expected to be rigidly interpreted. In the light of the decisions rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court and Hon‟ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, the plea raised by the assessee is unsustainable in law. Thus observing, he dismissed the issue raised by the assessee. 8.1. On careful analysis of the decisions rendered by the learned CIT(A) , we are of the considered view that the same is in accordance with the provisions of law applicable thereto and also in consonance with the dictums of the Hon‟ble Apex Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court stated supra. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the conclusion so reached by the learned CIT(A) on this issue requiring interference. Accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue raised by the assessee is dismissed by upholding the findings reached by the learned CIT(A). 10. The next issue raised by the assessee challenging the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.143(3) in pursuance to notice u/sd.143(2) issued on extraneous reason and without any application of mind of the Assessing Officer. 10.1. This issue is decided by the learned CIT(A) along with the issue of passing assessment order u/s.143(3) without passing 143(1) order. Hence, for the reasons stated supra, we find the issue raised by the assessee is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed by upholding the findings of the learned CIT(A). 11. Now coming to the other issue raised by the assessee challenging the order of the lower authorities in not allowing the provisions for NPA on mercantile basis as has been claimed by the assessee. 11.1. This issue is dealt with by the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order from paragraph 4.1 onwards. While deciding this issue, the learned CIT(A) has considered the relevant provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the I.T.Act with reference to the decisions rendered in the cases of Seshasayee Bros Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusion reached by the learned CIT(A) is in accordance with the law laid down by Hon‟ble Apex Court and therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A). We uphold the same by finding the issue raised by the assessee as devoid or merit. 13. The other issue raised by the assessee relates to confirmation of the addition of ₹ 25,72,876 made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 13.1. This issue is considered by the learned CIT(A) in paragraph 5.1 onwards in the impugned order. While adjudicating this issue, the learned CIT(A) has relied on the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal order dt.17.6.2011in ITA No.195/CTk/2010 in the case of Saroj Kumar Mishra. Besides this, he has analysed the issue threadbare in the light of the various judicial pronounced relied upon by him, which are as under : 1. Jaipur Bidyut Vitaran Limited v. DCIT (2009) 123 TTJ 888 (Jp), 2. Teja Construction v. Asst.Commissioner of Income-tax (129 TTJ (Hyd)(UO) 57, 3. K.Srinivash Nadu ( 131 TTJ (Hyd) (UO) 17, 4. Bhoruka Finance Corporation v.Union of India [202 ITR 723 (Karn) 5. Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless Genral Finance & Inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
