The Commissioner of Income-tax, Belagavi v. Shri Sangam Sahakari Sakkare Karkane Niyamith
[Citation -2017-LL-1030-22]
| Citation | 2017-LL-1030-22 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | The Commissioner of Income-tax, Belagavi |
| Respondent Name | Shri Sangam Sahakari Sakkare Karkane Niyamith |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 30/10/2017 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | prejudicial to the interest • banking regulation act • co-operative society • co-operative bank • due verification • question of law • interest income • dividend income • admissibility of deduction |
| Bot Summary: | The assessee-respondent is a co-operative society engaged in the manufacture of sugar, for the assessment year 2009-10, assessments were concluded under Section 143(3) of the Act allowing the deduction 3 claimed under Section 89P(2)(d) of the Act. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Income Tax passed an order under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that the assessment concluded was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The appeal preferred by the assessee against the said order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal came to be allowed relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Sri Biluru Gurubasava Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha V/s CIT and the judgment rendered in the case of the Goa Shipyard Employees Co- operative Credit Society Limited V/s CIT. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue is in appeal. We have heard the learned counsel Sri Y.V.Raviraj appearing for the revenue as well as the 4 learned counsel Sri Gangadhar J.M. appearing for the assessee-respondent. The issue involved in this appeal is no longer res integra in view of the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi and another V/s the Totagars Co-operative Sale Society disposed off on 16.06.2017, wherein this Court has taken a view that the character of income depends upon the nature of activity for earning that income and though on the face of it, the same may appear to be falling in any of the specified Clauses of Section 80P(2) of the Act, but on a deeper analysis of the facts, it may become ineligible for deduction under Section 80P(2) of the Act. The similar substantial question of law being raised by the revenue for the assessment year 5 2009-10, the same view has to be taken by this Court. Respectfully agreeing with the judgment of this Court in ITA No.100066/2016, we answer the substantial question of law in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. |