The Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Salem - 7 v. M/s. S-1911, AN Pudur PACCS Ltd
[Citation -2016-LL-0930-67]

Citation 2016-LL-0930-67
Appellant Name The Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Salem - 7
Respondent Name M/s. S-1911, AN Pudur PACCS Ltd.
Court ITAT-Chennai
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 30/09/2016
Assessment Year 2012-13
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags co-operative society • credit society
Bot Summary: CIT(A) has erred in allowing deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Act in short. Nil after claiming deduction under section 80P of the Act to the tune of.68,17,431/-. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was served on the assessee on 02.09.2014. After verification of the details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act by allowing deduction under section 80P(2(C) and disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that against the order of the Tribunal, the appeals filed by the Department in respect of various assessees have been adjudicated against the Revenue by the Hon ble Madras High Court vide its order in TCA Nos. 735, 755 of 2014 and 460 of 2015 dated 05.07.2016, wherein, it was specifically directed the assessing authority to grant the benefit to 4 I.T.A. No.1108/M/16 the assessee available under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.


IN INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member I T.A. No. 1108/Mds/2016 Assessment Year :2012-13 Income Tax Officer, M/s. S-1911, Pudur PACCS Ltd., Ward 2(3), Vs. A.N. Mangalam Post, Salem - 7. Karippatti Via., Salem 636 106. [PAN:AAEAS8711R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT Respondent by : Shri M. Narayanan, ITP[Retd.Addl.CIT] Date of hearing : 26.09.2016 Date of Pronounce ment : 30.09.2016 ORDER PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by Revenue is directed against order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, dated 25.02.2016 relevant to assessment year 2012-13. Revenue has raised six grounds in its appeal, however, crux of issue is that ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short]. 2 I.T.A. No.1108/M/16 2. brief facts of case are that assessee is Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society filed its return of income on 19.09.2013 admitting total income of . Nil after claiming deduction under section 80P of Act to tune of .68,17,431/-. return filed by assessee was processed under section 143(1) of Act. case of assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of Act was served on assessee on 02.09.2014. In response thereto, assessee filed all details as called for. After verification of details filed by assessee, Assessing Officer has completed assessment under section 143(3) of Act by allowing deduction under section 80P(2(C) and disallowing claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of Act. 3. On appeal, by following decision of Tribunal in case of M/s. SL(SPL) 151, Karkudalpatty Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. v. ITO in I.T.A. No. 292/Mds/2014 dated 17.03.2014, ld. CIT(A) allowed appeal of assessee. 4. Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before Tribunal and ld. DR has mainly contended that against above decision of Tribunal, which was followed by ld. CIT(A), Department has 3 I.T.A. No.1108/M/16 preferred appeal before Hon ble Madras High Court and therefore pleaded that order of ld. CIT(A) should be reverted. 5. On other hand, ld. Counsel for assessee has submitted that against order of Tribunal, appeals filed by Department in respect of various assessees have been adjudicated against Revenue by Hon ble Madras High Court vide its order in TCA Nos. 735, 755 of 2014 and 460 of 2015 dated 05.07.2016 and also TCA No. 484 to 487 and 490 of 2016 dated02.08.2016. Thus, he prayed that appeal filed by Revenue should be dismissed. 6. We have heard both sides, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of authorities below. Before us, both parties have agreed that assessee is eligible to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of Act in view of above decisions of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court. In similar facts and circumstances on identical issue, while deciding appeals against Revenue in TCA Nos. 484 to 487 and 490 of 2016 dated 02.08.2016, Hon ble High Court has followed its own order in TCA Nos. 735, 755 of 2014 and 460 of 2015 dated 05.07.2016, wherein, it was specifically directed assessing authority to grant benefit to 4 I.T.A. No.1108/M/16 assessee available under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of Act. Respectfully following above decision of Hon ble High Court, ground raised in appeal of Revenue is dismissed. 7. In result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 30th September, 2016 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 30.09.2016 Vm/- Copy to: 1. Appellant, 2. Respondent, 3. CIT(A), 4. CIT, 5. DR & 6. GF. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Salem - 7 v. M/s. S-1911, Pudur PACCS Ltd
Report Error